Skip to main content

Full text of "Memoirs illustrative of the art of glass-painting"

See other formats

to the Library by 

Mi 8 ae s Sarah and Mary Lewis 


l.Ll'.ll lu.S, UKUS, 











The riglit of Translation is reserved. 


IK. . 


The present collection of Memoirs by the late Mr. Winston is 
published by some of his friends out of regard to his memory, 
and in a belief that to bring together in a convenient form 
much information and many critical remarks on glass-painting, 
hitherto dispersed through numerous volumes, will be acceptable 
to those who interest themselves in the art. 

The occasions on which the Memoirs were written, as well as 
their subjects, sufficiently appear from the table of contents, 
and require no observation at present. In arranging them 
chronological order has been observed ; but a reader little 
acquainted with glass-painting may find it convenient to dis- 
regard this arrangement, and to read first the ' Lecture delivered 
before the Working-men's Association at Lichfield,' which con- 
tains a popular and comprehensive view of the whole subject. 
This lecture, as well as part of the Memoir on the Painted Glass 
in Lincoln Cathedral, might serve as an introduction to a know- 
ledge of the art. 

The chronological order has been observed, because it was 
thought desirable to show the progress of Mr. Winston's opinions, 
and any modifications they may have undergone in a long series 
of years ; but, from the consistency and steadiness of his views, 
the latter seem to be very slight. The most material point on 
which he altered an opinion is noticed at length in the Bio- 
graphical Memoir. 

The Memoirs having been written at different times, and 
frequently treating of the same or very similar topics, some 
repetitions occur in them. These could not have been removed 
without too much interference with other matter with which 
they are connected ; for they are not mere repetitions. In only 
two cases have passages been omitted as such, and therefore use- 
less. These are noticed in the proper places. 



No alterations have been made in the Memoirs beyond the 
correction of a few trifling and evident mistakes. 

The notes to the Memoirs are those which were originally 
attached to them, except a very few merely giving necessary 
explanations and references. These are generally placed be- 
tween brackets, besides being sufficiently distinguishable from 
the others by their contents. 

The letters to Mr. Charles Heath Wilson were not furnished 
by him with a view to their publication ; but when examined, 
parts of them seemed of sufficient general interest to be included 
in this volume. The selection of such as are now published 
was not made by him, nor had he an opportunity of seeing it 
till after the letters were printed. Two or three of the remarks 
then made by him are given in the corrections and additions. 

The plates and vignettes are all taken from Mr. Winston's 
drawings of glass-paintings. The diagrams and illustrations 
originally accompanying a few of the Memoirs 1 are republished, 
except four plates illustrative of the painted glass in Salisbury 
Cathedral. Those originally given were executed according to 
a process then new, and are spoken of in the Memoir, and in 
a note to it, as " rough." New coloured lithographs from Mr. 
W r inston's drawings of the same subjects have, therefore, been 
now substituted for them. 

A short index has been added for convenience of reference 
to subjects which might not be readily found by means of the 
table of contents. 

1 Namely, those on Winchester, York, Lincoln, Gloucester, ami the Beauchamp 
Chapel, Warwick. 



Biographical Mrmoik .. .. .. .. .. •• •• 1 

Appexdix to Biographical Memoir — containing Letters to Mr. P. II. 
Wilson respecting the Painted Windows for Glasgow Cathedral. 


I. — March 21. Glass-painters have yet to be fomied — Byzantine origin 

of the style of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries .. .. ..18 

II. — April 4. An inferior kind of the new glass manufactured — The 
genuine new glass equals the old — No nineteenth-century style of 
glass-painting adapted to Gothic buildings of the twelfth and 
thirteenth centuries — Byzantine origin of the art of the latter 
period — In glass-paintings for buildings of that time recourse 
should be had to the Antique — Asceticism condemned — Choice 
of subjects for Lincoln Cathedral .. .. .. .. ..19 

III. — Aprd 20. Prints give no correct idea of the effect of glass-paintings 
— In designing for glass-paintings a knowledge of the material is 
necessary — Hedgeland — Excellence of the west window at Norwich 21 


IV. — February 11. Eemarks on the Norwich windows — Of dulling glass 23 

V. — February 15. Account of a discussion with Baron M. . . . . 25 

VI. — March 8. The employment of foreign artists recommended in order 

that the whole work may be by the same hand . . . . 26 

VII. — March 12. German figures not sufficiently severe for the thirteenth- 
century style — Bisk of having the figures and patterns inharmonious 
if two artists are employed — Artistic figures preferable to observance 
of antiquarianism .. .. .. .. •• •• ..27 

VIII. — March 16. Antiquarianism to be rejected if incompatible with 
good figures — If Munich artists are employed, a style as late as 
the fifteenth century is recommended . . . . . . . . 28 

IX. — March 25. As to striking out a new style — Beference to his book 

on that point — Bemarks on a design, and on the treatment of canopies 29 

X. — April 6. The mediaeval mode of treating canopies the result of 

XI. — May 18. Bemarks on a foreign design — The German foliage better 

suited to a poor material than that of the thirteenth century .. 31 

XII. — No date. Example from Angers Cathedral that a later style does 

not necessitate an alteration of the plan of an earlier design . . . . 32 

XIII. — May 24. Bemarks on a design .. .. .. .. ..32 

XIV.— June 11. Gothic forms objected to — Faults of the Houses of 

Parliament .. .. .. .. .. •• •• ..34 

XV. — June 18. The Munich artists must be made to understand what 

kind of design is wanted .. .. .. .. •• ..34 

XVI. — June 26. Mediaeval artists followed the style of their own age, 

without reference to archwologv . . . . . . • • 35 

b 2 




XVII. — August 15. Reason for employing Munich artists — In what 
respect Hedgeland and Nixon are better — Experiment of the Temple 
windows .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..36 

XVIII. — August 18. In ancient glass-paintings regard is had to the 
quality of the material — How fifteenth-century artists would have 
treated an ancient design — Early English and Decorated styles 
compared . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 

XIX. — September 1. Wall-decorations — How far landscape backgrounds 

are admissible in them and in glass-paintings .. .. .. ..40 

XX. — September 17. English glass-painting does not improve — Remarks 

on two windows in B Church — Objection to small groups of 

figures — Gothic not the architectural style for the nineteenth century 41 

XXI. — October. Periods of the termination of pure Byzantine, and of the 
perfection of Mediaaval art — Badness of figures in the Decorated style 
— Early English a development of archaic Greek — Superior to 
Decorated .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 42 

XXII. — November 8. La patina — Method of producing the effect of 

age on glass-paintings .. .. .. .. .. .. ..44 

XXIII. — Of touching up glass-paintings with colours not burned in — Of 

two new windows in the Temple .. .. .. .. ..46 

XXIV. — December 26. In what respect Nicholas Pisano was recom- 
mended in a former letter — Of modified thirteenth-century orna- 
mentation .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..47 

XXV. — March 24. The old glass-painters disregarded principle .. 48 


XXVI. — September 22. Excellence of the Glasgow windows, and critical 

examination of them with reference to those of Lichfield .. .. 49 

XXVII. — October 16. Copy of a letter to Herr Ainmtiller on the Glasgow 
windows — Their superiority to all his other works attributed to the 
disuse of enamel colours . . . . . . . . . . 53 

XXVIII. — April 5. Of the treatment of the clearstory windows in 

Glasgow Cathedral, and references to examples .. .. ..56 

XXIX. — June 23. French and German artists look more to fame and 

less to profit than the English .. .. .. .. .. ..56 

XXX. — January 18. Remarks on some lights intended for Glasgow, by 

Mr. Hughes .. .. .. .. .. 57 

XXXI. — October 26. On the painted glass in Gloucester Cathedral and 

Nettlestead Church, Kent .. .. .. .. .. ..58 

XXXII. — December 7. Of clearstory windows .. .. .. ..59 

XXXIII. — January 15. Mischief of Mediaeval mania — Inconsistency of 
Gothic architecture with modern refinement — Only two courses to 
be followed in designing windows for Mediaeval churches .. .. 60 



I. — A Short Notice of the Painted Glass in Winchester and its 

[From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at Winchester, 1845.] 

Classification of glass-paintings .. .. .. .. .. ..63 

Specimens of Early English at St. Cross, and in two boxes in "Winchester 

College .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..64 

Specimens of Decorated in St. Cross, and in the Cathedral and the College 64 
Perpendicular more abundant .. .. .. .. .. ..65 

Modem glass in the College . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 

Sixteenth-century glass the only glass that can now be successfully 

imitated .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..67 

Glass in east window of the College Library . . . . . . 68 

Arms of Cardinal Beaufort in the Refectory of St. Cross . . . . 68 

East window of the Choir of the Cathedral . . . . . . . . 68 

Heraldic glass of James I. and Charles I. in the Library of the Deanery .. 69 

II. — On the Painted Glass in the Cathedral and Churches of 


[From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at York, July, 1846.] 

Portion of a Jesse, the oldest glass in England . . . . . . 71 

The Five Sisters 72 

The glass in the Chapter-house .. .. .. .. .. ..72 

In the Nave of the Cathedral 73 

The earliest Perpendicular glass in the Cathedral . . . . . . 73 

The white glass less green than in the west and south of England . . 74 

Glass-painting from Eouen presented by Lord Carlisle . . . . 74 

III. — An Account of the Painted Glass in Lincoln Cathedral and 
Southwell Minster. 

[From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute, at the Annual 
Meeting at Lincoln, 1848.] 

Origin of glass-painting .. .. .. .. .. .. ..77 

Meaning of white glass, coloured glass, Pot-metal glass, coated or flashed 

glass 79 

Description of the method of Theophilus, or Mosaic system . . . . 79 

The enamel system of glass-painting . . . . . . . . . . 81 

The Early English, Decorated, Perpendicular, and Cinquecento periods . . 83 
The works of the Van Linges, and of the Prices .. .. .. ..85 

The great Rose or Wheel window in the Cathedral .. .. ..85 

Notice of some places where there arc specimens of early glass-paintings 

in England (note) . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 



The glass in the other windows of the Cathedral .. .. .. ..88 

The glass in Southwell Minster . . . . . . 89 

Observations on the present state of glass-painting .. .. ..90 

Of the harmony of a glass-painting with architecture .. .. ..91 

How far Gothic glass-paintings harmonize with Gothic architecture .. 91 
Gothic pattern glass-paintings harmonize with Gothic architecture, but 

Gothic picture glass-paintings do so imperfectly .. .. ..92 

The quality of the modern material an additional cause of defective 

harmony in modern imitations of them . . . . . . 95 

Suggestions for obtaining harmony between the glass-paintings and the 

architecture by colouring .. .. .. .. .. ..97 

Of the flatness of mediaeval glass-paintings .. .. .. .. .. 101 

Of Picture-windows for Perpendicular and Classical Buildings .. .. 104 

IV. — On the Painted Glass at Salisbury. 

[I'rom the volume of Procee lings of the Archaeological Institute at Salisbury, 1849.] 

Destruction of painted glass during Wyatt's "restoration" .. .. 106 

The original glass of the Cathedral and Chapter-house .. .. .. 108 

Remains of a " Stem of Jesse " . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 

The medallion pictures .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 110 

The shields of arms .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 112 

The ornamental patterns in the Cathedral and Chapter-house .. ..115 

Progressive change in ornamental patterns .. .. .. .. .. 117 

Ornamented borders to the pattern-windows .. .. .. ..119 

Painted glass in St. Thomas's Church . . . . . . . . ..122 

In the hall of John Halle 123 

Perpendicular and Cinquecento glass in the Cathedral .. .. .. 124 

Arms of Bishop Jewell .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 125 

The modern glass in the Cathedral designed by Reynolds, and executed 

by Eginton .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 125 

The Lifting up of the Brazen Serpent, by Pearson .. .. .. .. 126 

The introduction of landscapes into mural-paintings and glass-paintings 

defended .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 127 

V. — On the Painted Glass in New College Chapel and Hall, 


[From the Archaological Journal, vol. ix., March, 1852.] 

Dispersion of the remains of the original glazing .. .. .. .. 131 

Fragments in boxes at Winchester College .. .. .. .. .. 131 

The northernmost west window of the Antechapel .. .. .. .. 132 

The first north window of the Antechapel from the west .. .. .. 134 

The second ditto .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 135 

The two east windows of the Antechapel .. .. .. .. .. 136 

The south window of the Antechapel .. .. .. .. •• 143 

The southernmost west window ditto .. .. .. .. •• 144 

Remarks on the date, style, and general effect of the original glazing of 

the chapel .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 145 

One of the earliest specimens of Perpendicular .. .. •• ■• 146 



Smear-shading stippled (an invention of the early part of the 14th 

century) differs from stipple-shading .. .. .. •• •• 147 

The beauty of the windows is derived from the fine tone and harmony of 

the colouring, and its perfect keeping with the architecture .. .. 147 

The glass of the choir windows .. .. .. .. • • •■ 149 

First south window from the east .. .. .. .. .. ..150 

The second .. .. .. .. .. .. •• •• •• 151 

The third 152 

The fourth 152 

The fifth 152 

Tracery lights — First north window from the east .. .. .. 154 

The second, third, fourth, fifth 154 

The great west window in the Antechapel designed by Reynolds .. 155 

The painted glass in the hall windows .. .. .. •• •• 156 

Coats of arms .. .. .. .. .. .. •• •• 156 

Supplementary note .. .. .. .. .. •• •• •• 158 

VI. — On the Painted Glass at Bristol, Wells, Gloucester, and 


[From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at Bristol, 1851.] 
The east window in Bristol Cathedral judiciously restored .. .. 160 

Represents a stem of Jesse .. .. .. .. .. .. ..161 

Its probable date 1320 162 

The glass in the side windows of the choir . . .. ... .. ..162 

Its probable date .. .. .. .. .. •• •• •• 165 

The rest of the glass in the Cathedral .. .. .. .. .. 166 

The glass in the Mayor's Chapel .. .. .. .. .. .. 167 

The glass in Wells Cathedral 167 

The east window of the choir of singular design .. .. .. .. 168 

The glass in Gloucester Cathedral . . . . . . . . . . • • 169 

The great east window .. .. .. .. .. .. •• 169 

On what its effect depends .. .. .. .. .. .. •• 170 

Some interesting Decorated and Perpendicular specimens .. .. .. 171 

The glass in Exeter Cathedral .. .. .. .. .. •• 171 

Repeated examination of ancient glass necessary to appreciate 

peculiarities .. .. .. .. .. ■• •• •• 172 

Architecture and glass-painting unreasonably regarded as of purely 

ecclesiastical interest .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 172 

Misapplication of the epithets Pagan and Christian . . . . . . 172 

The difference between the ancient and modern material maintained .. 173 

VII. — On a Revived Manufacture of Coloured Glass used in 

Ancient Windows. 

[From the Transactions of the Royal Institute of British Architects, 1852.] 

Of the harmony between the design and execution of the earliest glass- 
paintings, and the quality of the material . . . . . . . . 175 

Simplicity of the design and execution of the earliest glass-paintings .. 175 
Their flatness the result of circumstances, not of principle.. .. ..176 



Contrast exhibited by the glass-paintings of the 16th century .. .. 177 
Difference between the quality of the glass of this period and that of the 

12th and 13th centuries 177 

Harmony between the material and the mode of working it, from the 

cessation of the early fiat style to the adoption of the rotund or 

pictorial .. .. .. .. ,. .. .. .. .. 178 

Changes in the quality of the material previously and subsequently to the 

middle of the 14th century .. .. .. .. .. .. 178 

Harmony between the material and the mode of working it since the 

middle of the 16th century .. .. .. .. .. .. 179 

Difference of effect between the early glass-paintings and the imitations of 

them .. 180 

Method of testing the proper opaqueness of glass .. .. .. .. 180 

Of antiquating glass .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 181 

Difference between the colours of ancient and modern glass .. .. 181 

Of the revived manufacture of coloured glass . . . . . . . . 182 

Analyses by Dr. Medlock, and their result . . .. .. .. .. 182 

Appeal to the architects to promote the improvement of glass-painting .. 183 

Injurious influence of the false estimate of the middle ages .. .. .. 184 

VIII. — On the Methods of Painting upon Glass : an Explanation 
given at a Meeting of the Royal Institute of British Archi- 
tects, March 7, 1853. 

[From the Transactions of the Institute.] 

Fitness of the enamel system of glass-painting for cabinet works .. .. 186 

Beautiful work by Valsecchi of Milan .. .. .. .. .. 186 

The objection to the use of leadwork in the mosaic system equally 

applicable to the enamel system .. .. .. .. .. 187 

The mosaic system the best for large works . . . . . . . . . . 187 

Remarks on Bertini's 'Dante and his Thoughts,' in the Exhibition of 1851 187 
The windows in St. Gudule's, Brussels, and in Lichfield Cathedral, the 

most perfect specimens of glass-painting .. .. .. .. 188 

.. 189 
.. 189 
.. 189 
.. 189 

The practice of Capronnier and Bertini opposed to this opinion 

The Temple windows 

Effect of silver-coloured glass 

Ancient practice of putting tinfoil behind glass 

IX. — On the Application of Painted Glass to Buildings in various 

Styles of Architecture. 

(Read at a Meeting of the Royal Institute of British Architects, Nov. 28, 1853.) 

[From the Transactions of the Institute.] 

Of the best subjects for glass-paintings .. .. .. .. .. 191 

Pattern windows comply with the conditions of glass-painting .. .. 192 

So rlo the picture-windows of the 12th and 13th centuries .. .. 193 

The simple composition of such windows . . . . . . . . . . 193 

The picture-windows of the Cinquecento period, and their composition .. 194 

Examples in Brussels and Lichfield Cathedrals referred to .. .. 195 

Of the glass-paintings of the 14th and 15th centuries, and their inferiority 196 



Glass-paintings of the 12th and 13th centuries harmonize best with 

Norman and Early English buildings, ou account of their colouring 198 
Cinquecento glass-paintings, though not inferior in power, do not so well 

harmonize with them .. .. .. .. .. .^ .. 199 

What glass-painting will harmonize with the Greek style .. .. 201 

Ancient sculpture and tessellated pavements might afford hints .. .. 202 

The proper degree of relief considered .. .. .. .. .. 203 

What glass-painting will suit Palladian buildings .. .. .. .. 203 

Objections to receding pictures in glass-painting considered .. .. 205 

How a 19th-century window may harmonize with early buildings .. 208 

Change in glass-painting, and in the manufacture, about 1380 .. .. 209 

The same scale of figures should be preserved throughout a window .. 211 

Designs extending beyond a single light .. .. .. .. .. 211 

Defence of some remarks in the ' Hints on Glass-painting ' .. .. 213 

X. — On the Resemblance between Medieval and Classical Art as 



(Read at the Ordinary Meeting of the Royal Institute of British Architects, June 1 6, 


[From the Transactions of the Institute.] 

Influence exerted by classical antiquity through Byzantium .. .. 216 

Probability that glass-painting in the West was first practised at 
Limoges, and that the earliest coloured glass was made from 
Byzantine receipts .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 217 

Resemblance of early glass -paintings to the illuminations of Greek MSS. 218 
Resemblance of the costume to the antique .. .. .. .. 219 

Expediency of studying antique models .. .. .. .. .. 220 

XI. — On the Glazing of the North Rose Window of Lincoln 


[From the Archseological Journal, vol. xiv. 1857.] 

Judicious restoration of this window .. .. .. .. .. 222 

The subjects in the window described .. .. .. .. .. 222 

The date of the original glazing is the end of the 12th or beginning of the 

13th century .. 225 

The colours of the glass examined .. .. .. .. .. .. 226 

Of the Ruby glass in the window, and remarks on Ruby glass .. .. 226 

The influence of Greek art may be discovered in the drawing and in the 

draperies .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 228 

Objections to the Renaissance, as Pagan, are unreasonable .. .. 230 

XII. — A Lecture on Glass-painting, delivered before the Working 
Man's Association at Lichfield, 1859. 

/ Definition of a glass-painting .. .. .. .. .. .. 231 

The usual practice in glass- paintings at present .. .. .. .. 232 


Mode of making glass .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 233 

Of colouring it 234 

The windows of St. Sophia had coloured glass .. .. .. .. 235 

Discovery of the art of painting on glass .. .. .. .. .. 236 

The treatise of Theophilus .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 237 

The earliest known specimens of glass-painting .. .. .. .. 'Z3S 

Division of glass-paintings into picture-windows and pattern-windows .. 238 
Of the former into Medallion, Jesse, and Figure and Canopy windows . . 238 
The usual style of a Medallion window .. .. .. .. .. 238 

The Jesse window, and Figure and Canopy window .. .. .. 241 

Influence of Greek art .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 241 

Period from which modern art dates .. .. .. .. .. 242 

Change introduced into glass-painting by mullions .. .. .. 243 

Introduction of the yellow stain .. .. .. .. .. .. 244 

Change in the manufacture of glass about 1370, accompanied with a 

change in the mode of painting it .. .. .. .. .. 245 

Figure and Canopy windows prevalent during the Perpendicular style of 

architecture .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 245 

The only two ways of producing a picture on glass .. .. .. 246 

The Penaissance .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 247 

Glass-painting partook of the improvement of painting in the 15th 

century .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 248 

Glass-painting reached its excellence between 1530 and 1550, and then 

began to decline .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 248 

The Lead-work and Saddle-bars are to be taken into account in designs 

for glass-paintings .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 249 

Of the shading of glass- paintings .. .. .. .. .. .. 250 

Notice of the windows in Lichfield and Prtissels Cathedrals, and of 

subsequent works previously to the recent revival .. .. .. 251 

The Munich school of glass-painting . . . . . . . . . . 252 

Defective, but superior to the English .. .. .. .. .. 253 

Glass-painting not judiciously cultivated .. .. .. .. .. 254 

XIII. — Ok an Heraldic Window in the North Aisle of the Nave of 
York Cathedral. By Charles Winbton and Weston Styleman 

[From the Archaeological Journal, vol. xvii. I860.] 

Extensive remains of painted glass of the 14th century in York Cathedral 256 

General description of the window which forms the subject of this 

memoir .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 257 

Its detailed description according to a diagram .. .. .. .. 258 

Armorial bearings described .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 263 

Life of Peter de Dene .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 265 

The donor of the window .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 272 

The heraldry in the window examined to ascertain its date .. .. 272 

The royal escutcheons .. .. .. .- .. .. .. 272 

The arms on. the surcotes of the figures in the middle light .. .. 274 

The date of the window most probably 1306 or 1307 .. .. .. 277 



Of the origin of the double-headed eagle .. .. .. .. .. 278 

Some of the earliest examples of it .. .. .. .. .. .. 281 

Note, examining the heraldry in other windows of the nave .. .. 281 

Supplementary note on the Bell-founder's window .. .. .. 284 

XIV. — An Account of the Painted Glass in the East Window of 
Gloucester Cathedral. 

[From the Archaeological Journal, vol. xx., 1863.] 

Inference as to the country in which Gothic architecture originated, drawn 

from the size of the windows .. .. .. .. .. .. 285 

Change which took place in the manufacture of glass, and its influence on 

glass-painting .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 286 

The stone-work in the east window of the Perpendicular style, the 

painted glass a pure example of Decorated .. .. .. .. 286 

General design of the glass- painting . , . . . . . . . . . . 2a6 

The originality of the present arrangement of the glass examined .. 291 

Unnecessary expense avoided by mediaeval artists .. .. .. 292 

The leading subject of the design was the Enthronement of the Virgin .. 293 
Detailed description of it .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 294 

The heraldry in the window examined .. .. .. .. .. 300 

The date of the window fixed by it .. .. .. .. .. .. 305 

The window probably given by Lord Bradeston . . . . . . . . 306 

Mischief of restorations .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 30S 

Judicious restoration of this window .. .. .. .. .. 308 

Cost of, and estimates for, the restoration (note) .. .. .. .. 309 

The fine tone and rich hue of the glass . . . . . . . . . . 309 

Defective execution .. .. ■ .. .. .. .. .. .. 310 

XV. — Remabks on the Painted Glass at Lichfield Cathedral. 

[From the Archaeological Journal, vol. xxi., 1864.] 

The glass-paintings brought from the dissolved Abbey of Herckenrode .. 312 

Influence of the Renaissance apparent in these windows . . . . . . 313 

The style in which they are executed defended .. .. .. .. 313 

Flatness in glass-paintings considered .. .. .. .. .. 315 

Errors in the works of the Renaissance .. .. .. .. .. 316 

Manner in which the difficulties of the art have been met, and its 

resources developed, in these windows . . .. .. .. .. 317 

Recommendation of the study of them .. .. .. .. .. 320 

The Munich school of glass-painting, and their altered practice displayed 

at Glasgow 320 

Subjests of the windows (note) .. .. .. .. .. .. 322 

Description of, and remarks on, the windows in Brussels Cathedral (note) 323 

Notice of the author's death (note) .. .. .. .. .. .. 325 



XVI. — The Painted Glass in the Beauchamp Chapel at Warwick. 

(A Memoir read at the Annual Meeting of the Archaeological Institute at Warwick, 
July 26, 1864.) 

[From the Archaeological Journal, vol. xxi. 1864.] 

Extracts from Sir "William Dugdale's account of the windows 

Brief survey of the side windows of the chapel 

Description of the east window 

Examination of the present arrangement of the glass 

Remarks on the heraldry 

Description of the figure of the Virgin 

Remarks on a head of Christ 

Further description of the window .. 

The contract with the glass-painter .. 

Remarks on the execution of the work 

Comparison with the Lichfield windows 

Notice of the author's death 

Catalogue of Drawings of Glass-Paintings, by 




vs .. 


.. 327 

.. 329 

.. OOO 

.. 334 


.. 336 


.. 337 

.. 338 

.. 339 

.. 339 

.. 340 

.. 340 

ate Charles 

.. 343 

.. 359 

Shield, with 1. H. S., from Much Hadham Church, Herts. 


Figure of a Bishop, from German glass, in the collection of the late Lord 
Herbert of Lea, supposed date about 1505. (This plate is presented 
to this volume by the Rev. J. L. Petit.) Frontispiece. 


Shield, with I. H. S., from Much Hadham Church, Herts xiv 

Portrait of late Charles Win stou to face 1 

Fragment of foliage from Cologne Cathedral 17 

Fragment from same 62 

Group of figures from Winchester College Chapel 63 

Arms of Cardinal Beaufort, from the Refectory, St. Cross .. to face 68 

Figure of Glass-painter, from Winchester College Chapel 70 

Fragment from Cologne Cathedral 76 

Medallion from Lincoln Cathedral, Legend of St. Gregory .. to face 77 

Part of a Jesse, from Llanrhaidr Church to face 86 

Head from Bristol Cathedral 105 

Patterns from Salisbury Cathedral to face 109 

Patterns from same to face 116 

Pattern from Char tham, and a German pattern to face 118 

Geometrical patterns from Salisbury to face 121 

Arms, Edward I., from St. Alban's Abbey 129 

Arms, John of Gaunt, from the same 159 

Arms of France, from Froyle Church, and Arms of Berkeley, from 

Bristol Cathedral to face 165 

Fragment from Cologne Cathedral 174 

Patterns from Merton College, and from Lincoln Cathedral .. to face 175 

Shield, Lion rampant, from St. Alban's Abbey 185 

The Last Supper, from German glass in the collection of the late 

Lord Herbert of Lea to face 190 

Head from Bristol Cathedral 2L4 

Fragment from Cologne Cathedral 221 

Diagram of North Rose window, Lincoln Cathedral 223 

Figures from Nettlestead, Kent ; Barnwell, Northamptonshire ; and Bush- 
bury, Staffordshire to face 231 

St. Anne teaching the Virgin, from Stanford Church, 1335 .. to face 244 

Arms, Edmund of Langley, Duke of York, from St. Alban's 255 

Diagram of an Heraldic window, York Cathedral 259 

Fragment from Cologne Cathedral 284 

Diagram of East window, Gloucester Cathedral 288 

Figure, part of a Knight, from Adderbury, Oxon 311 

Arms, Lichfield Cathedral to face 312 

Group, fragment from Lincoln Cathedral 325 

Diagram of East window, Beau champ Chapel, Warwick 328 

Emblem of the Trinity, from Redcliffe Church 342 

Ornamented circle, with I.H. S., from Thaxted Church, Essex, 1490 .. 362 

The initial letters of the Memoirs are from New College Chapel, Oxford. (See 
p. 133.) The Cologne fragments are from the collection of J. D. T. Niblet, Esq. 


It should have been mentioned in the Biographical Memoir, that in 1849 Mr. 
Winston published an ' Introduction to the Study of Painted Glass.' (J. H. 
Parker, Oxford.) It is founded on the Memoir on the Painted Glass at 
Lincoln, and includes the substance of a lecture given at Oxford in that year. 

Page 55. Add as a note to Letter XXVII. 

Mr. Winston did not see the completed works. Since the remarks in this 
letter were written, other windows have been added of equal merit as works of 
art with those on which he comments. 

Page 56. Add as a note to Letter XXVIII. 

Mr. Winston's advice as to clearstory windows has been acted upon with 
entire success. 

Page 57. Add as a note to Letter XXIX. 

Mi". Wilson had published short memoirs of the distinguished artists by 
whom the windows were designed. 

A circumstance recently mentioned by him proves the general interest which 
such works as the Glasgow windows are capable of exciting. Observing that 
many of the working-men came to the cathedral to look at them,, he offered 
to give a lecture on them. The number of applications for tickets of admission 
was nearly 6000. 

This fact seems to offer an encouragement for the completion of the similar 
works at St. Paul's, and to justify a hope that the}' will he equally popular. 

Page 125, line 22, and in the Index, for "Egington" read "Eginton." 
Page 350, line 9, for " Nethereale," read " Nether Seale." 





HE life of the author of the following Memoirs, of 
whom some account may here be expected, offers 
few of the materials which generally render bio- 
graphy interesting or amusing. It was active and 
useful, but not eventful, having been chiefly passed 
in the steady exercise of a profession, in the cul- 
tivation of some favourite branches of knowledge, 
and in a liberal application of the fruits that were 
reaped from them. He was not either by birth or accident placed 
in any unusual position, or exposed to vicissitudes of fortune ; 
he was unconnected with political parties and public events ; 
and happily quite free from the eccentricities and irregularity 
Avhich sometimes cause amusement or regret by their contrast 
with the talents with which they are united. The outline, 
therefore, of his life may soon be traced ; and no attempt will 
be made to fill it up with trifling anecdotes and circumstances 
of common occurrence, neither conveying useful information 
nor illustrating character. Connection with the art from whose 
future history his name will never be separated is the only 
circumstance which can attach any public interest to his life ; 
and therefore it is to matters arising from this connection that 
the greatest portion of the following Memoir will be given. 

Charles Winston was born at Lymington, in Hampshire, on 
the 10th of March, 181-1, and was the elder of the two sons of 
the Kev. Benjamin Winston, and Helen, daughter of Sir Thomas 
Keid, Baronet. Of his mother he was deprived in childhood ; 
and the care of his early years devolved on his father's mother, 
Mrs. Sandford. She was the only child of Charles Winston, 
formerly Attorney-General of Dominica ; and it was in com- 
pliance with a condition in his will that her son, under a private 
Act of Parliament, took the name of Winston instead of Sandford. 


He held the living of Farningham, Kent, upwards of thirty 
years, bnt resigned it in January, 1848. 

In the vicarage-house of this parish the boyhood and early 
youth of Charles Winston were passed. Here he was educated 
by his father till the age of fourteen or fifteen ; and when 
at that age he became one of the pupils of the Rev. Weeden 
Butler, who then resided at Farningham, he still continued to 
live at the vicarage. This home education probably was an 
advantage to him, and may have contributed towards the forma- 
tion of his future character in its best features ; for it was a 
home under whose unperceived influence, independently of any 
direct precepts, his good principles and generous and honourable 
sentiments, free from the least taint of affectation and display, 
might have been imbibed, and where a spirit of intelligent 
curiosity would have been awakened and encouraged in a mind 
naturally active and thoughtful. 

On the completion of his education the law was, after a short 
interval of uncertainty, fixed upon for his profession. He was 
accordingly entered at the Inner Temple, and became a pupil 
of Mr. Warren, now a Master in Lunacy, and afterwards, for a 
short time, of Mr. Twopenny. 

He commenced the practice of the law as a special pleader ; 
and in this severe discipline he most probably acquired or 
strengthened his habits of minute accuracy and patient industry. 

In 1845 he was called to the bar, and became a member of 
the Home Circuit. But his business continued to be still chiefly 
confined to his chambers ; he did not very frequently appear in 
court as a barrister, and but seldom went on the circuit ; and 
never perhaps the entire circuit. He was much engaged in 
arbitrations, and in drawing specifications of patents ; and in 
the latter a fertility in mechanical contrivance, and an early 
fondness for and quickness in understanding machinery, were 
frequently of use to himself, and sometimes to his clients; for 
he is said occasionally to have suggested improvements and to 
have corrected errors in the patents for which he was preparing 
the specifications. 

Daring many years also he was in the habit of acting as a 
deputy -judge in some of the county-courts ; and on the whole 
his business was a considerable one, although, as is not unfre- 
quent in the law, his reputation might not extend beyond the 
limits of the profession. It was through his other pursuits that 
his name became more generally known. 

In the practice of the law he continued till the year 1864. 


In the month of May in that year he married Maria, youngest 
daughter of the late Philip Raoul Lempriere, of Rozel Manor, 
Jersey, a family with which he was already connected by the 
marriage of his mother's sister with a younger brother of Mr. 
Lempriere. On this marriage he withdrew from his profession. 

Mr. Winston's residence in London — first as a student, and 
afterwards as a practitioner of the law — gave him an oppor- 
tunity of becoming acquainted with several who, either profes- 
sionally or by choice, were occupied with some of the branches 
of art and antiquities, for which he had already formed a taste. 

He was among the earliest members of the Archaeological 
Institute ; and indeed had been one of a small private society, 
witli some of whose members the establishment of the Institute 
originated. An article by him on painted glass accordingly 
ap; eared in the first number of their journal : and this was his 
first published essay. The following pages will sufficiently show 
that he continued to be a frequent contributor to it, and to take 
an active part in the proceedings of the society. 

Though fond of every branch of the fine arts, and of the anti- 
quities connected with them, glass-painting was his chief favourite, 
and the special object of his study. This had engaged his 
attention while yet a boy ; and in the catalogue of his drawings, 
printed in the present volume, one may be seen with as early a 
date as December, 1830. It was perhaps in the early part of 
that year that he began the study of the art. 

Though it is generally impossible to fix on the circumstance 
by which the mind is directed to a particular pursuit, and a 
predominant taste acquired, an attempt is often made to assign 
one whenever eminence has been attained. Thus a recent notice 
of Mr. Winston and his works atttributes his taste for glass- 
painting to the influence of the painted windows at Oxford. 
The cause assigned is a plausible one ; but in the present case 
there was no opportunity for its operation. If a cause is to be 
sought, it is more likely to be found in circumstances connected 
with some repairs and improvements in the church at Farning- 
ham, in the course ol which a little old j>ainted glass came into 
his father's possession, and an acquaintance was made with the 
late Mr. Miller, an eminent glass-painter of that time. Con- 
versation and discussions arising out of these matters would 
hardly fail to interest an intelligent boy ; and they might give 
a particular determination to his natural sensibility to beauty of 
form and colour ; nor is it improbable that they might also con- 
tribute to encourage his taste for architecture. 

b 2 


The assiduity with which, from the early date above noticed, 
Mr. Winston made drawings of ancient glass-paintings is appa- 
rent from the list of them ; and the fidelity and spirit with 
which he reproduced as well the colours as the designs of the 
orioinals are extraordinary. To borrow some remarks from a 
notice appended to the last of the following Memoirs : " his 
drawings of glass-paintings are unequalled. In character and 
expression, force, truth, purity, and brilliance of colour, as well 
as in the representation of the texture of the glass, they are 
unparalleled. They are, in fact, as perfect facsimiles of the 
original as can be produced by water-colour upon paper." 

In 1847 he published his 'Inquiry into the difference of 
Style observable in ancient Glass-paintings, especially in Eng- 
land, with Hints on Glass-painting.' The origin of this book 
is stated in the preface to it. As long ago as 1838 he had 
drawn up and circulated among his friends, in manuscript, a 
brief treatise, in which he had reduced the different styles of 
glass-painting to classes, in imitation of Eickman's ' Gothic Archi- 
tecture,' arranging them in corresponding periods. This sketch 
was the foundation of the larger work which he was encouraged 
to undertake by Mr. Parker, of Oxford, who published it. But 
the original slight outline had to be carefully and minutely filled 
up ; and to collect new materials, to arrange the mass pre- 
viously accumulated, to examine many questions which from 
time to time arose, and to prepare drawings for the plates, 
formed a work of much labour, in which he had no assistance 
from English or from foreign treatises, though he has referred 
to two or three of the latter for corroboration or illustration. 
The work was quite original, and completed without neglect of 
his profession. For it would be a mistake to suppose that, either 
then or in subsequent years, he neglected the law for its more 
attractive rival. An instance of the diligence with which he 
would at the same time apply to both occurs in a letter of twelve 
closely-written sides of note-paper to his friend Mr. Wilson, 
consisting of minute observations relating to the windows of Glas- 
gow Cathedral, of which more will be said hereafter. "Only 
fancy," says the letter, " since the 24th of September " (the date of 
it being the 26th of October) " I have disposed of four thousand 
cases and thirty insolvencies in the courts here. Hard work, I 
assure you." Another letter, on the same circuit, and relating to 
the same subject, is written "just before going into court." 

On these circuits the opportunity of examining glass-paintings 
was never omitted. In a letter written while holding courts at 


Shrewsbury, he says, " I have seen more than the usual quantity 
of modern glass during my late peregrinations in England and 
Wales ; and certainly, if anything, the art has lowered during 
the last year." In fact, glass-painting never escaped his atten- 
tion. On a tour in Germany, for instance, a piece of ancient 
painted glass was observed in the windows of an inn where the 
horses were baiting. It was carefully examined, a note made, 
and mention of it, as an example of some peculiarity, is intro- 
duced into the book we are now speaking of. 

This book, which has been long out of print, and therefore 
may be here a little more particularly noticed, consists, as the 
title indicates, of two parts — the first containing a brief history 
of glass-painting, a description of its different methods, and a 
very minute examination and arrangement of its styles; the 
second offers some critical observations on its modern state, on 
its peculiarities as a branch of painting, on the principles accord- 
ing to which it ought to be exercised, and on the causes which 
have been opposed to its successful cultivation since the modern 
revival of it. There is also an appendix containing a translation of 
that portion of the ' Diversarum Artium Schedula ' of Theophilus 
which relates to glass-painting ; and both in this appendix, and in 
the notes, much miscellaneous, interesting, and instructive matter 
is introduced. The second volume of it consisted of plates. 

The styles are divided, according to Hickman's nomenclature, 
into the Early English, the Decorated, and the Perpendicular ; 
but with the addition of the Cinquecento — the most perfect 
style ; glass-painting not having declined contemporaneously 
with Gothic architecture, but having attained its highest degree 
of excellence when the latter was considerably debased. The 
Cinquecento style existed for thirty years contemporaneously 
with the Perpendicular. 

All these styles are frequently mentioned, and more or less 
particularly described, in the following Memoirs ; but their cha- 
racteristic features are delineated with much more minuteness 
in the Inquiry ; and they are also there illustrated with nume- 
rous plates. 

To the style of glass-painting between the Cinquecento 
period and the recent revival, the name of the Intermediate 
style was given in the hope that the present age might develop 
a new and improved style. 

For the formation of such a style, the total relinquishment 
of all copies and imitations of ancient glass whatever is advo- 
cated. " It is evident," he observes, " that the first step towards 


elevating glass-painting to the rank it once held among the arts, 
is to estimate its productions by those sound rules of criticism 
which are alike applicable to all works of art, and not by the 
sole standard of antiquarian conformity. But I fear that this 
principle cannot be carried into effect whilst glass-painting is 
confined to mere imitation. In estimating the merit of an imi- 
tative art, two points are really presented for consideration — its 
quality as a work of art, and its conformity with the conven- 
tionalities of style. But inasmuch as a knowledge of the con- 
ventionalities of style is more commonly possessed than a know- 
ledge of the principles of art, because the former is incomparably 
easier of acquirement than the latter, amateurs, who exert a 
very powerful influence on the state and condition of glass- 
painting, are apt in their criticisms to fall into the error of re- 
garding a conformity with style, not as an accessory to the glass- 
painting, but as constituting the sole end and essential object of 
the work. Hence a copy or a mere compilation, scarcely rising 
in merit above a copy of some ancient glass or other painting, 
is so often preferred to a design which attempts, however artis- 
tically, to carry out an ancient style in spirit rather than in 
conventionality only, because the mere coj^y will naturally exhibit 
a closer and more literal compliance with the petty details of 
style than the latter more intrinsically meritorious work — a 
course which cannot fail to retard materially the real advance- 
ment of glass-painting as an art, and the full development of its 
powers." 1 He then proceeds to detail the methods by which, 
whilst glass-painting may be improved as an art, it may be har- 
monized with the architecture of Norman, Early English, and 
Decorated buildings. 

The views in this chapter of Iris book he retained with little 
or no alteration. In a letter to Mr. Wilson, of the 25th of 
March, 1857, he observes : " As to what you say of striking out 
a new style of treatment, it is precisely what I meant when I 
wrote that book, < An Inquiry into the difference of Style in 
Glass-painting.' I had not looked at it for years till last night, 
when I read through the chapter beginning at p. 268. I was 
surprised to find how little of it I should wish altered were it 
now to be re-written : and I am pleased at this, and to observe 
that you, though working from a different point, have tended so 
nearly to the same conclusion. I wish you would just run your 
eye over it. It is very short." 

1 P. 283. 


The leading doctrines which he has always steadily main- 
tained are — that glass-painting should be treated as a branch 
of the art of painting, distinguished only by the peculiarities 
arising from the nature of the materials ; that within the limits 
imposed by these peculiarities, representation should be cha- 
racterized by the highest perfection of art in design, colour, and 
expression, and not made in the rude and imperfect manner 
prevalent during its earlier periods, which, in fact, was the 
result of ignorance, not of intention ; that the distinguishing- 
excellences of a glass-painting — brilliancy and transparency — 
should be carefully preserved ; that designs for a glass-painting 
should always be made and coloured with reference to the 
quality of the glass to be used ; and that consequently an artist 
who makes designs for glass-painting should have not only a 
knowledge of this particular branch of painting, but also a prac- 
tical acquaintance with the qualities of different kinds of glass. 
Finally, he repeatedly urges that glass-painting should be treated 
simply as an art, free from the restraints of antiquarianism, and 
guided by a taste unwarped by ecclesiastical prejudices and 
religious associations. 

On one point, very slightly indeed indicated in the present 
book, but occasionally alluded to in some of the following 
memoirs and letters, he appears to have altered a long-cherished 
opinion ; but the change does not involve any inconsistency with 
his leading doctrines ; and it is, in truth, nothing more than an 
alteration of opinion as to the possibility of designing the figure 
portions of painted windows so as to harmonize with the style of 
early buildings without offending the refinement of modern taste. 1 

He had long entertained an idea, founded on the striking- 
similarity of treatment in drapery which is observable between 
archaic Greek and very early Christian art, and is frequently 
pointed out in the following memoirs and letters, that the latter 
might be improved by a judicious study of the former, which is 
so much more graceful in its lines, and in the general com- 

On this ground he based his proposal to improve designs for 

1 The following remarks on Mr. opportunities of knowing how much 

Winston's change of opinion, the nature Mr. Winston was in the habit of dis- 

and extent of which have been some- cussing with him both glass-painting 

what misunderstood, have been com- and other branches of art, and how 

municated by his friend Mr. Charles much he relied upon his judgment. 

Heath Wilson, of Glasgow, whose name This is, indeed, sufficiently shown by 

has already occurred. Though a stranger the annexed correspondence. 
to Mr. Wilson, the editor had many 


glass-painting in the Early English style by the study and imi- 
tation of archaic Greek works ; and, as a natural sequence, while 
he advocated this improvement in drapery, he pointed out that 
the human form might be in like manner improved from the 
same source. It was in conformity with these views that the 
windows in the round part of the Temple Church were executed ; 
but by a letter to Mi\ Wilson, — the last in the annexed corre- 
spondence, — this idea appears to have been abandoned, together 
with that of any other modification of mediaeval art. In this 
letter it is said : " In designing windows for mediaeval churches, 
there are but two courses — either to adopt modern art (which 
is the best course where figures are introduced), or to adopt 
medio3val art. There is no middle course, as I once supposed 
and advocated, of getting a modification of mediaeval art by 
good artists : you have entirely convinced me of my error. The 
Glasgow windows, and also the Alnwick window, by Dyce, are 
sufficient proof that I was wrong, and that you were right." 

At the commencement of his career as a critic Mr. Winston 
took high ground for glass-painting, and insisted upon the im- 
portance of constituting this art a branch of the fine arts, and of 
avoiding all mere literal imitations of old forms ; he insisted 
upon the necessity of introducing correct forms and natural 
expression, and of designing the figure parts of windows as well 
as the existing state of fine art will admit of. But he never lost 
sight of the conditions of glass-painting. These he thoroughly 
understood, but he thought their observance consistent with 
good art. 

He could not for some time emancipate himself entirely from 
some prevalent ideas of archaeological consistency, which have in 
reality fettered glass-painting and prevented its advancement as 
an art ; but, having insisted upon its capability of higher things, 
he for some time thought it possible to combine the two objects 
— that which he so ardently wished to see realized, and that 
which so many held to be of equal importance. Hence his 
earnest search among the monuments of past ages for examples 
which might illustrate his meaning, and his recommendation of 
those archaic forms of Greek art which combine so much that is 
beautiful with a resemblance to peculiarities of style or treat- 
ment in early glass-painting. 

His opinions upon this subject were supported by the obvious 
influence of Greek upon Byzantine forms of ornament, a result 
probably of their imitation, in a rude and imperfect manner, of 
the Greek remains by which the artists were surrounded. A 


better and more accurate study of these remains, of which we 
possess so many fine examples, by artists of higher cultivation, 
might, he thought, develop an art in the same direction which 
then would harmonize with ancient edifices, and yet be excellent 
in form. An unceasing study of art, however, which occupied 
every leisure hour, modified these ideas, and they were finally 
abandoned ; but he adhered to his early proposition that glass- 
painting should be a fine art ; feeling the general truth that the 
more perfect its forms, the more truly it harmonizes with 
the perfection of ancient forms of architecture, although it might 
not harmonize in the letter with the imperfect paintings of the 
same age. 

The success of a glass-painting depending as much on the 
quality of the material employed as on the skill of the artist, 
improvement in the modern manufacture of coloured glass was 
not less an object of Mr. Winston's attention than the establish- 
ment of correct principles and the elevation of the art to 
a higher standard of excellence. He therefore applied himself 
to the examination and comparison of specimens of old glass, 
from even the earliest times, to chemical analyses, and to making 
some experimental manufacture according to the results which 
were obtained from these and the ancient receipts preserved in 
the treatise of ' Theophilus.' These investigations were attended 
with much success ; but it will be more interesting to give an 
account of them and their result in his own words from two 
letters written to Mr. Wilson in 1856. 

The extracts from these letters will also furnish a specimen of 
his characteristic energy ; and they will at the same time, unfor- 
tunately, show the vexation which his sensitive nature experienced 
at the obstacles thrown in his way by indifference or self-interest, 
and at the more surprising want of support from those who with 
more carefulness had it in their power to effectually improve 
the art which, in point of expenditure, they were so liberally 

" Ever since 1850," says the first of the letters just mentioned, 
" I have been amusing myself, at no small cost, in having 
analyses made of ancient glass, that of the twelfth and thirteenth 
centuries in particular, and have entirely succeeded in discovering 
its manufacture, thus clearing up many points which before 

were only matters of conjecture. I gave the analyses to , 

who has the glass-works close to this place, and with my scientific 
friends assisted him in reproducing the ancient material, which 
he has done most successfully, and I have had two windows 


done in the Temple Church (the round part) to commemorate 

our triumph. Whether will go on making the glass 

when not working under my eye, is another question ; but the 
problem is solved, and this is most interesting to me as an anti- 
quary, and ought to be so to the artist, for there can be no 
mistake about the effect of the new material, which is as harmo- 
nious in colour, brilliant, and at the same time solid in appear- 
ance, as the old glass is. By these means, therefore, a great, and, 
as I thought at one time, insuperable obstacle to making designs 
after the remains of the twelfth and thirteenth century glazing, 
has been entirely overcome, and I only wish you were in these 
chambers at this moment, in order that I might compare with 
you the results of our researches with the genuine old specimens. 
We have beat the French glass-makers so hollow that it is quite 
laughable, and one of then* chief glass-painters has actually 

ordered some glass of , an incontestable proof of English 

superiority. I am not surprised, for, in the first place, I went 
to better chemists than those employed in these matters in 
France ; and, when we came to work the matter synthetically, I 
had the good fortune to obtain the service of a first-rate chemist, 
who took up the matter as an amateur, like myself, without 
which, considering the enormous difficulties which a totally dif- 
ferent existing form of furnace and different fuel from that 
formerly in use presented, we never could have turned our 
analvses to any practical use. You see, therefore, I have not 
been idle; but I have had to work entirely by myself, exposed to 
all the attacks and sneers which I have provoked by holding an 
independent course, and not allying myself to the 'friends of the 

movement,' Mr. and his friends who write in the . 

Had I been a Puseyite I dare say I should have been lauded to 
the skies — so much for party spirit ; which, however, I can well 
afford to laugh at." 

In the second letter, of the 20th April, 1856, Mr. AYinston 
writes : — 

" It was in the hope of procuring a good material on which 
to work, that in 1850 I employed a first-rate professional chemist 
to analyze some old twelfth-century glass, and I subsequently 
got a pupil of the same man to analyse many other specimens. 
I offered to Chance of Birmingham the analyzes if he would 
attempt to work them out, but he refused ; and ultimately 

, of . offered to take the matter up, and he erected 

a furnace for the purpose. It was fortunate that did 

offer, for without his aid there could have been no practical 


result ; and had his place been further from the Temple, I 
could not have attended to the experiments as much as I did, 
nor could I have got my chemical friend to do so ; and if we 

had not attended, 's people must have utterly failed to do 

anything. For the operation was a regular chemical one from 
beginning to end, requiring pure chemical knowledge, and a 
great deal of it too, to carry it out ; and a branch of chemistry, 
Ly the bye, on which comparatively little is known. I am con- 
fident that the labours of the last six years have made my 
chemical friends better acquainted with the subject than any 
other chemists. Indeed, we have actually produced glass at 

's which a good chemist told me (not knowing that we 

had succeeded in making it) was impossible to be made. The 
only colours we have hitherto tried our hands at are blue, the 
streaky ruby, several but not all kinds of green, yellow, white, 
and a few shades of purple ; which no one else has succeeded in 
producing. We have been trying only for twelfth-century 
colours as yet, and of these we have not yet attacked the 
whole ; but what we have done, we have done thoroughly. The 
discouraging part of it is, that I must attend to it myself, if I 
want the glass for any work in which I am interested. Many 
glass-painters do not know good glass from bad. Indeed, some 

of them actually encourage to make a sort of glass in 

some sort resembling the real thing, which glass has been 
imitated by others ; so that I expect (as it is much easier to be 
made in a short time) the real manufacture will be given up, 
except when particularly asked for. I may say that this result 
has already taken place. When therefore you hear of Winston's 
glass you must bear in mind that there are two sorts — the right 
sort, including nearly the whole of the twelfth and thirteenth 
century colours, and some of the colours of the sixteenth cen- 
tury ; and the wrong sort. My friends and myself are content 
to be judged by what has been done under our own eye ; but 

we do not stand godfathers to all that makes to please his 

customers. We have worked out the problem, and shown 
people that the old glass can be reproduced ; but if they object 
to the price, and are content with an imitation, they are only 

fit to be left to shift for themselves. Mr. and myself 

were requested by the Dean and Chapter of Norwich to super- 
intend a large window which was done for their cathedral. 

We had no check on the artist, nor on ; the consequence 

was that the trouble we had to keep matters straight — for 
the Dean and Chapter had stipulated for the new glass — was 


so great that we both were sick of it before the work was 

" Afterwards the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln begged me to 
superintend eight windows, now in progress, for their cathedral. 
I consented on one condition, that their contract with the glass- 
painter contained a stipulation that it should be executed with 
glass to be approved of by me. The result of this is, that, 
though six months at least have elapsed, the whole of the glass 
is not yet made. I declare to you that the bother I have had 
about this I will never undergo again. If our glass-painters 
would but back me up, there would be no difficulty; but you 
may suppose what the taste is, when I am doing all I can to 

have the glass made one way, and 's general customers doing 

all they can to have it made another way. I mention all this 
merely to show the lamentable state of glass-painting." * 

Mr. Winston was naturally vexed that glass was not made 
according to his directions ; but no blame can be imputed to 
the manufacturers for preferring their own methods. They are 
o-entlemen of known skill ; and Mr. Winston did not prefer any 
coloured glass to theirs. As, however, he anxiously disclaimed 
responsibility for all glass not made according to his own views, 
it is but just to him to relate the circumstances as they occurred ; 
nor is it unjust to the glass-makers. If the glass now usually 
made by them is as good as, or better than, that made according 
to his wish — facts not here disputed — the credit will belong to 
them solely. Should the other kind be wished for on any occa- 
sion, they are the only persons who can supply it. And it must 
be distinctly understood that the preceding extract from Mr. 
Winston's letter is given simply as a narrative of what took 
place in the progress of some interesting discoveries in the 
manufacture of coloured glass, and of circumstances connected 
with them, as they existed seven or eight years ago. It con- 
tains no criticism on glass made subsequently to the period 
of its date ; and it is obvious that all comment, either by way of 
praise or blame, on the past or present productions of the glass- 
makers is quite foreign to the present Memoir. 

Notwithstanding the neglect, and even the direct opposition 
and ridicule, with which the attempts to improve the manufac- 

1 Some account of this new glass may is attributed to Mr. (now Dr.) Medlock, 

be seen in one of the following memoirs, of the Koyal College of Chemistry, and 

entitled, 'Ou a revived Manufacture of to the practical skill of Mr. Edward 

Coloured Glass used in ancient Win- Green, of Messrs. Powell's glass-works in 

dows,' where the merit of the discovery Whitefriars. 


ture of coloured glass at first had to contend, the merit of the 
discovery has been at length acknowledged. Mr. Apsley Pellatt, 
a very competent judge of their value, considers " that the 
colours of the glass in the Temple windows are equal to the old ; 
and that a debt of national gratitude is due to Mr. Winston for 
his long persevering and successful efforts to revive the rich 
colours and low tone of ancient glass. 1 Some churches where it 
has been used will be mentioned in another place. 2 

This long and minute study of glass-painting, in all its bear- 
ings, was well known to most who take an interest in the art, 
and hence Mr. Winston was frequently consulted on intended 
works. To applications of this kind he seldom or never failed 
to give his cheerful and active assistance ; nor is the zeal with 
which he used to exert himself to be ascribed merely to a love 
of the subject. To enter warmly into any cause in which he 
engaged, and to give a careful and conscientious examination of 
every matter submitted to his opinion, was a marked feature 
of his character, as many of his friends who may have had occa 
sion for his aid and advice in their private affairs must have 

The part he took in the painted windows of Norwich and 
Lincoln Cathedrals has already been noticed in the account of his 
experiments on the manufacture of coloured glass ; but the most 
important work on which he was consulted was that arising from 
the restoration of Glasgow Cathedral. In this he was deeply 
interested for some years ; and as there is extant an extensive 
correspondence relating to it with Mr. Wilson, the latter was 
applied to for information. 

A letter which Mr. Wilson wrote in reply is here inserted, 
with very trifling omissions, as it will give a much more lively 
idea of Mr. Winston's zeal and activity, and of the influence he 
exercised over the execution of this undertaking, than any gene- 
ral statements could afford : it will also explain some passages 
in the annexed correspondence. 

To some readers, moreover, everything connected with this 
great work — the greatest of the kind which has been executed 

1 ' General View of Glass-painting, by quality of glass. Improvements in the 
Mr. Apsley Pellatt, in connection with colouring and manufacture of glass 
the Jury's Report on Stained Glass, and arising from them were communicated 
Glass used for Decoration.' In the to Herr Ainmuller while the Glasgow 
' Builder ' of October 11, 18(32, p. 735. windows were in progress. The letters 

2 See a note to 7th memoir. to him will probably be made public. 
The experiments above noticed re- Mr. Winston was also in correspondence 

lated to both the colours and texture or with a French amateur on the subject. 


in modern times in these kingdoms, and which has already ex- 
ercised a decided influence on a kindred work now in progress — 
may not be uninteresting ; it is therefore hoped that the some- 
what disproportionate space which is given to these windows in 
the present Memoir will be excused. 

Mr. Wilson's letter is dated the 15th of December, 1864, and 
is addressed to his friend Mr. Penrose. 

After mentioning the circumstances in which the plan for 
filling the windows with painted glass originated, the first step 
towards effecting it, and his application to various persons dis- 
tinguished in science and art for advice, Mr. Wilson proceeds : — 

" I wrote also to Mr. Winston, recalling myself to him as an 
old acquaintance. His reply to that letter is the first of the 
series which I send to you. 

" It is necessary to the comprehension of our relationship that 
I should state to you that my acquaintance at that time with the 
subject of painted glass was but general, limited to a knowledge 
of a few foreign works regarding it, and to the windows of some 
continental cathedrals and churches, upon which I had at 
different times made some notes. 

" I had earnestly adopted the ideas of those who maintained, 
like our friend Mr. Winston, that the windows ought to be works 
of art in a high sense. 

" Such was the state of matters when my late friend responded 
to my request, and permitted me to sit at his feet, and to share 
in the rich stores which he had accumulated. He saw the im- 
portance of the undertaking, and expressed his approbation of 
the general plan which I had submitted for consideration, and 
entered upon the subject with all the zeal and warmth of his 

" Our correspondence on every subject connected with glass- 
painting and the proposed windows commenced, and was carried 
on, at the rate of about three letters a week for years. 

" Aided by his advice, I visited the most important works of 
glass-painting in England and in France. Never had pupil such 
a master as mine. He gave me at times daily lessons ; advised 
me what to see, and where to see it ; sent me introductions 
to several men learned in our subject, and communications of 
the opinions of others whose opinions were of value. He revised 
my specifications for the artists ; added to them, especially upon 
technical points ; and although in his letters upon the subject he 
says that he had but little to alter, I feel that they would not 
have been so complete or valuable without his care and advice. 

"He visited Glasgow upon several occasions, and met our 


committee, offering them, I need not say, invaluable advice, and 
encouraging them in the course which they had adopted ; he also 
delivered a public lecture in Glasgow, which, though calculated 
for a different class of hearers, and therefore not so well under- 
stood as it deserved, aided in confirming the growing belief that 
the windows ought to be works of fine art. 

" Throughout the whole of our undertaking Mr. Winston 
advised us upon every subject connected with the technical 
execution of the windows ; and in my correspondence with the 
Inspector of the Royal Glass-painting establishment at Munich 
I acted by his advice in all points relating to the subject. 

" When our first window arrived he came to see it — a window 
which, as we had desired, proved to be free of certain charac- 
teristic defects in the execution of other works in Germany — a 
fine mosaic, skilfully and tastefully carried out in all its parts, 
but in some defective in power of colour, and exhibiting in the 
ornamental portions certain German mannerisms, which we 
anxiously desired should not be repeated. Our representations 
were received by the artists with the utmost courtesy. They 
sometimes expressed surprise at the knowledge of detail mani- 
fested in our communications. This we owed to Mr. Winston's 

" The great improvement which was manifested in successive 
windows shows the value of Winston's advice to us, communi- 
cated by me to the artists. 

" On the art-part of the subject we also exchanged ideas ; and 
I may be permitted to say — judging by his own expressions — 
that I was privileged to afford him some instruction in the prin- 
ciples of monumental art, as applied to glass-painting ; and as a 
consequence of that long and intimate correspondence he aban- 
doned — not the general high principles which he had established 
in his writings — but some of his proposed methods of carrying 
out those principles. 

" Our correspondence continued to within a few days of his 
death. His letters were latterly principally occupied with the 
proposed windows at St. Paul's Cathedral, and with the advice 
which he was giving the inspector at Munich upon the subject 
of the manufacture of glass, so as to improve upon the too pel- 
lucid material hitherto used by the Munich school. There was 
every prospect of success attending these labours when he so 
suddenly died. 

" From all that I have said you may estimate the invaluable 
nature, as well as the extent, of the services which he rendered 


to us in Glasgow, and the beneficial influence which he brought 
to bear upon our enterprise and upon the artists whom we em- 

Of the correspondence mentioned by Mr. Wilson in the pre- 
ceding letter, a small portion will be found in the Appendix to 
the present Memoir. The minute remarks and criticisms on 
glass-painting will perhaps be instructive and interesting to 
many ; and they may direct the attention of those who have the 
direction of similar works to points important to their successful 
execution. The letters too may occasionally, though rarely, 
supply the want of correspondence on more general topics, in 
showing something of the opinions and manner of the writer. 

Mr. Wilson has mentioned that the latter part of his corre- 
spondence related principally to the proposed glass-paintings for 
St. Paul's Cathedral. Mr. Winston had been nominated one of 
the committee for the embellishment of this edifice, and naturally 
gave his chief, though not an exclusive, attention to the intended 
glass-paintings, entering into the subject with the same ardour 
which he had manifested in the case of the Glasgow windows. 
One of the latest acts of his life was to make a journey to 
Brussels to meet Herr Ainmiiller, the director of the Munich 
establishment, in order to confer with him on the proposed 
windows, with the advantage of being able to refer to those of 
the Cathedral of St. Gudule, for enforcing and explaining the 
views of the Committee more fully than could be done by mere 
verbal directions or by correspondence. 

In the success of these windows of St. Paul's, so fine a field for 
the application of his favourite Cinquecento style, he was deeply 
interested ; but he was not to see the result of even the small 
portion of the work actually in progress. In 18G3 his health had 
shown signs of being seriously undermined. The nature of the 
disorder, originating most probably in too anxious and laborious 
occupations, was obscure ; but one of the most dangerous symp- 
toms in which it manifested itself was an affection of the heart. 
To this he became a victim, dying quite suddenly while alone in 
his chambers in the Temple on the 3rd of October, 1864, during 
a temporary visit to London from the neighbourhood where he 
had been passing part of the summer. 

Several public notices of this unlooked-for event showed the 
esteem in which he was generally held. Two of them, paying a 
tribute to his peculiar talents, and feelingly expressing a sorrow 
widely partaken of for the loss of an amiable and accomplished 
friend, are retained at the end of the concluding memoirs of this 


collection, as they originally appeared. They make it unneces- 
sary to say more on this topic ; nor is it requisite to examine in 
detail Mr. Winston's abilities and personal character, the more 
prominent features of which are sufficiently apparent. The 
former were certainly of a high order, and could not fail to attract 
attention; but the latter might merit greater praise. Many 
have doubtless surpassed him in natural abilities, and many 
more in extent and variety of knowledge ; far fewer in moral 
worth. Few have passed a more blameless life, and few have 
united more of the qualities which win confidence and affection, 
and command respect. 



Respecting the Painted Windows for Glasgow Cathedral. 


My DEAR SlR, Temple, 21st March, 1856. 

I am quite glad to renew our acquaintance after the lapse of 
so many years, and I assure you your note was a source of great 
gratification and encouragement to me, showing, as it does, that the 
views of so practical a man as yourself entirely corroborate mine 
as a mere amateur. I quite agree with you that we have still our 
glass-painters to form. At this moment I can hardly name, with 
the exception of Mr. Hedgeland (who has painted the west window 
at Norwich), a single real artist who is also a glass-painter. 

Mr. has designed several windows, some tolerably good ; and 

Dyce made a capital design for the Duke of Northumberland, which, 
however, was obliged to be sent to Munich for execution. Ward 
stands supreme as a master of ornamental detail, and he has an 
assistant who draws well, but not quite in the way you would 

like. There are several other glass-painters, such as ■ , , 

, and one or two others whose names I at present forget, whose 

artistic power does not accord with their really honest attempts at 

But the great mass, such as , , , , &c, can 

only be looked upon as mere tradesmen, at the best. They cannot 
even copy correctly, but have set up a style of their own, which 
resembles the old work only in its defects. If you could manage 
to found a school of art in glass, you would indeed supply a desi- 
deratum. You will have no competitors ; for I am sure that one 
good artist, fertile in invention, and having a competent know- 
ledge of ancient precedents, such as will enable him to catch the 
spirit, and not merely follow the letter of the ancient windows, 
would sweep the board in this case. 

[Here follows an account of the attempt to revive the manufacture 
of the old coloured glass, p. 9 of the preceding Memoir.] 


With regard to the style of glass-painting which I think should 
be followed, I cannot do better than refer you to the printed essay 
I enclose, which j t ou can use as you like, for I have another copy. 
Whether I am right in an artistic sense, I leave my betters to 
judge, and I shall be glad to know your own opinion. That I am 
right in an antiquarian sense, I have no doubt. All antiquaries are 
agreed that the style of art of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries 
had a Byzantine origin ; that it is derived immediately from the 
Greek, and but mediately from the Eoman art. I have several 
things here which would surprise you by their analogies. Putting 
history out of the question, there can be no shutting one's eyes to 
the language of existing monuments. The strongest resemblance 
is between the archaic Greek and the Early English. In the draperies 
we constantly recognise the pipe fold, the figure showing its form 
beneath the clothes, the folds originating in the limbs, not going 
across them, as in the fourteenth-century work ; and then again in 
the ornamental details, in the foliage, there is the Greek handling 
as plain as can be. I tried the experiment, in the Temple Church, 
of having several figures copied from Greek designs, and the orna- 
ment borrowed quite as much from classical Greek work as from 
that of the twelfth century, and you would be astonished how 
completely both agree with the character of the architecture. Of 
course the Temple windows are but experiments, done by a young 
draughtsman, so far as the figures are concerned. But it shows 
Avhat may be done, and what a scope there is for artists, even when 
they adopt a medallion style of composition, which, I think, is the 
only style favourable to a display of the richest colouring. How- 
ever, all this is gone into at length in the enclosed paper. 

I can only say, in conclusion, that I do not know which pleases 
me the most, to find that you are taking up the subject, or that a 
common pursuit has prevented the dissolution of our acquaintance. 

Yours very truly, 

C. Winstox. 


My dear SiR, Temple, 4th April, 1856. 

Absence from town has prevented my replying sooner to 
your letter. I am sure you do not at all overrate the difficulty 
of your position, for I know myself what uphill work it is to 
endeavour to make brother amateurs exert themselves, and the 
obloquy one is exposed to for simply speaking the truth, all which 
you will feel in a greater degree from your position as a practical 
man of art. However, I do not at all despair, if you persevere in 
your task, and do not throw it up in disgust. 

c 2 



I will as soon as possible procure you some specimens of the new- 
glass, and some of the ordinary glass to compare with it. ■ has 

been induced to make a spurious sort, and to sell it at a cheaper 
rate than the real stuff, in spite of all my remonstrances, and he 
is now reaping the natural result— seeing, that is, others imitate 
his glass and sell their spurious productions in the same way as he 
has sold his own. However, I mention this merely that you may 
be prepared for those detractors who say that there is nothing in 
the new manufacture. I do not think there is anything in the 

spurious work either of ■ or others ; but there can be no doubt 

that the glass made from the receipts I have supplied him with is 
really the same as the old, and he should endeavour to keep himself 
up to the mark. 

The full-sized drawings I possess of glass I should be sorry to 
send, partly for fear of accident, and partly because I find the 
greatest difficulty in making people not accustomed to them under- 
stand them. But I will send you a book containing a quantity of 
small-sized drawings, and especially of entire windows, which I 
have just now lent to a lady, as this, I fancy, will meet your wants 
completely. At present there is no nineteenth-century style adapted 
to a Gothic building of the twelfth or thirteenth; and such a style 
can only be founded conjointly on the works of the twelfth and 
thirteenth centuries, and the remains of antiquity. 

"You will see, in the Abbe Texier's work on the enamels of Limoges, 
that I am supported by facts, as well as the opinions of antiquaries, 
in ascribing a Byzantine origin to twelfth and thirteenth century 
art. It is clear that a Venetian colony settled at Limoges (I think, 
speaking from memory, in the tenth century), and we know that 
St. Sophia at Constantinople served as the model of St. Mark's at 
Venice. The connection between the Limoges people and the 
Venetians, and between the Venetians and the Byzantines, being 
made out, the question is, from what source did the latter derive 
their art ? and an examination of their works pretty well shows that 
it had its origin, partly in the old Boman, partly in the most ancient 
archaic Greek — the ancient air being ascribable rather to copying 
from antiquity than to inherent rudeness. 1 I want to see our own 
work for twelfth or thirteenth century buildings conducted on 
similar principles. I want no copying of the antique, no gods and 
goddesses, not even the expression of entire repose which we see in 
the old marbles ; but I want to see the antique used as Baphael 
used it ; as a means of representing the true Christian sentiment, in 
the most beautiful manner, and — because in the most beautiful — in 
the most winning and popular manner. Christianity is not taught 

1 See the Memoir on the resemblance the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, 
between mediaeval and classical art as and the Lecture read before the Lichfield 
exemplified in the glass-paintings of Working Man's Association. 


by holding up asceticism, or anything else naturally repulsive, to 
our admiration. Those who are the best Christians battle through 
ordinary life as Christians, and these are most encouraged by the 
example of persons of like passions and feelings, and exposed to 
similar temptations, as themselves. The instincts of the present 
age are opposed to descending to Gothic models, which at best, as in 
Peter Fischer's shrine at Nuremberg, are coarse as compared with 
what modern art, improved by the study of the most perfect models, 
would exact; and in the generality of instances they are below 

I think your selection of subjects very good, though no doubt 
there will be great difference of opinion on that matter. The Dean 
and Chapter of Lincoln, after much deliberation, the other day 
adopted a design setting forth the scheme of human redemption, of 
which I enclose a diagram. 1 have adopted a similar scheme, with 
the advice of our late veiy learned chaplain, in the windows here, 
and I think it interesting. 

Veiy faithfully yours, 

C. Winston. 


My DEAR Sm, Temple, 20th April, 1856. 

I am sure I shall only be too glad to give any little assistance 
in my power in maturing a work which will require the utmost 
energy of yourself and friends to carry through properly, and will 
demand a far greater expenditure of time and thought than the 
world will credit ; and, therefore, if the provost will favour me with 
a call here, I will show him whatever I have in the way of actual 
glass, or drawings from glass. My book with drawings was returned 
to me only yesterday, the friend to whom I had lent it having been 
obliged to leave town through severe illness. I will send it you 
to-morrow by rail. There are some sketches of entire windows in 
it, which I have found more useful than full-sized drawings of detail, 
in explaining the thing to persons having no previous knowledge 
of the matter, and in this respect you will find it of some little use. 
As for the engravings in the monograph of the cathedral of Bourges, 
or indeed the plates of any work, they entirely fail to give the effect 
of the glass, which can only be produced by carefully coloured 
drawings, and therefore they are to be considered merely as 
diagrams. I mention this because a good many people who set up 
as judges have derived their knowledge of the subject from prints, 
and not from a sight of the original works. This accounts for such 
persons looking with complacency on modern windows, which faith- 
fully reproduce all the bad drawing and bad composition of the old 


glass, without reproducing even in the slightest degree the colour 
and tone of the old glass, which constitute its redeeming feature. 

[Here follows an account of the experiments made for reproducing 
the ancient glass, inserted in the preceding Memoir, p. 9.] 

With regard to your inquiry about a designer, I think you will 
find that with a little attention you would yourself design the glass 
as well as, or better than, any living glass-painter. But then, 
without a practical knowledge of the subject, you would be sure 
to do things which, when the glass was up, would have the effect 
of making it quite different in appearance from what you intended. 
Thus, if you put a red streak and a green streak together, the 
chances are that the colours would neutralise ; so, if the white was 
not kept narrower than you would think necessary, it would spread 
over the design. These and a variety of other matters are to be 
learned only by experience, not only of the material generally, but 
of the new material itself (if used as I think it ought to be), which 
differs in an extraordinary degree from the ordinary material. 

What I should advise is to employ a glass-painter who is really an 
artist, and to exercise a considerable surveillance over him. Thus 
he would have the benefit of your artistic perception, and you would 
have the advantage of his technical knowledge, and being an artist 
he could embody your ideas. At present there is but one man 
whom I can think of recommending, George Hedgeland, of No. 2, 

Grove-place, St. John's Wood. Poor went out of his mind 

just after he had made a sketch for the west window of Norwich. 
After an immense deal of consideration the committee disregarded 

W 's and my advice to send the window to Munich, and adopted 

(as I thought as a pis aller) our recommendation of Hedgeland, then 
an unknown man ; but he has sent a piece of glass to the Hyde park 
Exhibition, decidedly the best piece of English glass there. As it 
happened, our recommendation turned out trumps, and I do not 
hesitate to say that, as a piece of true glass-painting (I say nothing 
about the design or the arrangement of the subjects, nor the choice, 
all which things were decided by the committee themselves), this 
west window of Norwich is the best window of modern times, 
whether English or foreign, and the only English window, in point 
of art, which will bear a comparison with the Munich windows — 
I mean in point of drawing and artistic execution. This window 

has been very much condemned * * * * 


* * *. But everybody whose opinion I prize has given 

the same praise to this great work. It has its defects, of course ; 
but these are far surpassed by its excellences. When I wanted 
some windows for the Temple Church — for which I caused the new 
glass to be made — I put them into the hands of Ward, and, indeed, 
I could not have done better at the time, for 1 knew that Hedgeland 


knew nothing about the technicalities of the twelfth-century orna- 
ment, and I wanted not to copy, but to have original designs, and 
without Ward's aid I could not have had my thoughts expressed. 
But the figures are not up to the mark. They were done by a 

young artist, a pupil of N 's, but who has not had the experience 

of Hedgeland, who is a regular artist. I therefore should not ven- 
ture to recommend him to you. 

Since the Temple windows were done, I delivered that lecture of 
which I sent you a copy, which had such an effect on Hedgeland, 
who saw at a glance what I meant by the connection between 
twelfth and thirteenth century and Greek art, that he set himself 
to work to examine the twelfth and thirteenth century ornamenta- 
tion ; and shortly after he was employed by the Dean and Chapter 
of Lincoln to paint the eight windows I have already mentioned. 

It is only necessary to see his designs to perceive the enormous 
superiority of an artist over the herd of glass -Wrights. His figures 
are intelligible, and many of them beautiful — Greek in character, 
but strictly in accordance with the ornament, which is first-rate 
thirteenth- century work. I do not mean to say that these windows 
are perfect models, but only that they are so enormously in advance 
of everything else (my poor windows are beaten hollow), that I 
should be most dishonest if I did not declare my conviction that 
Hedgeland is your man 

I have written you a long letter, but I thought I ought to let 
you a little behind the scenes. 

Yours very truly, 

C. Winston. 


My deae Wilson, Temple, 11th Feb. 1857. 

The Baron dines here on Friday, and I only wish you could 
meet him. I have been so busy that it was not until this evening 
that I found time to read your notes hastily over. Certainly, I 
ought to be satisfied, for never was there a more complete confirma- 
tion of my advice that the subscribers should resort to continental 
artists. I cannot tell you how much information I have derived 
from your notes, and I wish to keep them a little longer ; it is so 
satisfactory to have the opinion of another pair of eyes, not blinded 
(as mine are from a continual habit of looking at glass exclusively) 
to the inherent defects of all painted glass. Thus I should not have 
noticed the commingling of the designs in the Norwich window, 
simply because the old ones (the Gothic ones I mean) are as much 


commingled, and most of the Cinquecento also, the Brussels glass and 
one or two others from Belgium excepted. With regard to this 
window, I ought to say that the choice of designs rested entirely 
with the committee, and that Hedgeland thought that Albert Durer's 
designs would have suited better than Raphael's, the figures being 
slenderer, and the draperies more broken up. But my lords and 
gentlemen thought otherwise. Such a window would not suit your 
cathedral; had they attended to me, the landscapes would have 
been fainter and more monotonous, that is to say, more grey, as in 
Cinquecento work. I can quite understand what you say of the 
shadows of that window, though this did not strike me before. The 
shadows I know to be not a bit darker or more dense than those 
at Brussels, but they appear darker because the high lights are 
brighter, the glass at present being undulled by age. The shadows 
at Lichfield are quite as deep ; but here again the high lights are 
quite laid down by age. So also at King's ; some of the windows are 
as deeply shaded quite as this, but the high lights are toned down 
by age ; and it will be a question well worthy of consideration how 
far in new glass it may not be well, either to make the shadows 
lighter, or to dull the high lights. The dulling the high lights 
artificially is a hazardous experiment, for age produces a broken 
dulling, not a uniform dulling like art. And certainly the best 
specimens of artificial dulling that I have seen, as at Munich, look 
as if the glass had been ground. This is wholly destructive of the 
brilliancy and sparkling character of glass. But it is possible that 
some way may be devised of imparting the effect of age to the glass, 
though I doubt it. I am sure it would not do to shade figures as 
little as Lusson does, except when they are very small ; then it does 
not signify. It would be intolerable on a larger scale. The dry 
hardness of the Alnwick glass is owing to the shadows not being 
sufficiently stippled and juicy, or deep enough. Compare these with 
the Brussels glass, and you will see what I mean. If very light 
shadows are right, then William of Wykeham's glass in the ante- 
chapel of New College, Oxford, is superior to that of Brussels. 

D , I know, was very full of keeping the glass in his window 

flat, because the wall of the church was flat. But he was no logician, 
otherwise he would have seen the confusion of ideas involved in his 
proposition. This is well exposed by Dr. Johnson in the case of 

dramatic writing. But it is possible that what D wrote to the 

Germans had the effect of inducing them to alter their own style 
for the worse. 

I should give you a hint about D 's window. I dislike the 

canopy work as much as you do, but I believe that he is perfectly 
justified (having adopted the Italian Gothic) in mixing what you 
justly call "Gothic" and Byzantine. This mixture is inherent in 
the Italian Gothic, and constitutes one of the greatest objections to 


the style, though, strange to say, Euskin admires it. Therefore, be 

on your guard, as otherwise you will give an advantage. 

Also, he on your guard as to what you say of the date of the different 
parts of Glasgow Cathedral. ***** 
* ******* 


Yours most truly, 

C. Winston. 


My dear Wilson, Temple, 15th Feb. 1857. 

The Baron dined here on Friday, and I got Clarke to meet 
him. The result was that the clock struck twelve when we thought 
it was between nine and ten. We explained to him scientifically 
everything that occurred to us, as to all the peculiarities of tone, 
decomposition, &c, in glass of different dates and makes, and our 
learned companion retaliated by giving us the clearest explanation 
of art that I have ever had the good fortune to meet with. I fancy 
the greater part of the time was consumed in discussion that had no 
very immediate bearing on the matter in hand; but both Clarke 
and I are perfectly charmed with the Baron, who, however he may 
stand as an artist — about which I dare say there is the usual 
difference of opinion that occurs in matters artistical — is certainly 
gifted with an uncommon clear head and a most apt tongue. To be 

sure what a difference between him and ! He takes much the 

same view that I do of medallion windows, but says that to do them 
properly, and with the groups properly studied, would be too costly ; 
and his idea, as the safest, as well as that most within the compass 
of the subscribers, is to fill all the windows with white patterns, 
like those of the thirteenth century (of which you saw the approxi- 
mate effect at Merton College, Oxford), placing shields of arms in 
them, and a single angel at the top of each window, after the 
manner of Cimabue at Assisi. The idea of the angels (which, 
of course, would be done in the highest art) was new to me ; but 
I am convinced, as also was Clarke, who knows the cathedral well, 
that the Baron is right ; and that in this simple manner the most 
remarkable and satisfactory effect would be produced by my new 
glass, at no greater cost than the money already subscribed, without 
(larking the interior too much (which, I think, would be fatal), and 
with the certainty of success. I do not know what he means 
to do with the experimental window, but he has borrowed a 
number of drawings of me, so he seems determined to master the 


I am off to-morrow to South. Staffordshire, to encounter some 

rather harder work than my learned friend Mr. B • has to 

dispose of in his court. 

Yours very truly, 

C. Winston. 


My DEAR Wilson, Temple, 8th March, 1857. 

I only returned a week ago 

With regard to your note just received, I am as you are, my people 
are your people, my horses are as your horses. I am clearly of 
opinion that you must go abroad. I do not say this for the miserable 
sake of appearing consistent, but from the conviction I have arrived 
at from all the correspondence and argument that has taken place 
since I was at Glasgow, that, if you dabble with English glass- 
painters, you will get into a sad scrape. So strongly do I feel 
this, that I should of my own accord advise the matter to be put 
wholly into the hands of some foreigner — the execution of the glass 
as well as the making of the cartoons. But I will carefully consider 
the contents of your note, and write to you again on Monday. I 
am so busy just now, that I could not give it the attention which 
it demands. 

I sent the drawings he selected before I went to Stafford- 
shire, but I have not heard of him or from him since. 1 fear he will 
fail, unless he adopts my advice, and gets a practised hand, like 
Ward, to help him with the archaeological part of the business. I 
fear he is getting some fifth-rate man to try to design patterns from 
my drawings ; but though it seems easy enough to one who knows 
the principle upon which the old patterns were composed, it is not 
so easy to those who do not. Thus Pugin never saw the principle ; 
the consequence is, that his patterns are entire failures ; and if he 
failed, what is to be expected from a raw hand ? It is probable that 
you will be obliged to have pattern windows intermixed with picture 
ones ; but I should say, let the patterns harmonize with the pictures ; 
which can only be done by allowing the same hand to do the work. 
In other words, employ therefore foreigners entirely. I do not think 
that the employment of the new glass is of equal importance with 
keeping the whole work — picture-windows and pattern-windows, or 
windows composed partly of pictures and partly of patterns — in 
entire harmony, and this can only be done by employing the same 
hand throughout. 

Most truly you is, 

C. Winston. 



My DEAR WILSON, Temple, 12th March, 1857. 

I have been so engaged since I wrote that it was not until 
last night that I was able to complete the inquiries I wished to make 
respecting the cost of painted glass, when the cartoons are supplied 

to the glass-painter as you suggested 

As to the expediency of getting Hubner to execute cartoons for 
the figures, and Ward to execute the glass, I think, before you 
resolve upon this, you should a little consider the matter in its anti- 
quarian bearings. As I understand you, the object of employing 
Ward is to secure pattern- work of the first order (and there is no 
man who can approximate him in this), of a style in harmony with 
that of the building, that is to say, a style like that of the old 
patterns of the latter part of the thirteenth century, or early part of 
the fourteenth ; and those patterns must of course be executed in the 
new material, otherwise they must fail. On this last point I am so 
clear that I defy contradiction ; and then, to use this powerful glass, 
there must be no jemmification 1 of the pattern- work, it must be simple 
and severe like that of the period I have named. What, then, is the 
probability of Hubner's figures being in an equally severe and simple 
style ? If they should prove to be so, they will be the first German 
figures that ever have been ; for all the German figures that I have 
seen, even those in the Maria Ililf Church at Munich, which are 
associated with pattern- work of the early part of the fourteenth 
century, are in the style of the sixteenth century, or latter part of 
the fifteenth— a style far broader than that of the figures of the 
thirteenth century, more refined, and requiring a great deal more 
of shadow in half- tint than the earlier figures do ; besides having 
much the same black lines in them, and consequently harmonizing 
rather with the pattern- work of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries 
than with that of the thirteenth or beginning of the fourteenth. I 
suspect that the chances are that you would get your figures in one 
style, and the pattern- work in another ; which would not only set 
up the backs of the antiquaries, but would be positively wrong in 
point of art, and inharmonious. I am certain you must choose one 
of two things, — either have your pattern- work to match the building, 
and make your figure-work match the pattern- work, or else disregard 
the date of the building, and let the style of your figures be that of 
the pattern. For my own part, I should say, if you can get really 
first-rate artistical figures, which would harmonize with pattern-work 
of the earlier period, this should be the course ; but if there is a 

1 This alludes to the term jemmy-Gothic— i.e. mock Gothic — or modern imitation 
of the old Gothic. 


doubt about it, and you know that you can get artistical figures of a 
later period, do not hesitate for one moment to embrace the latter 
alternative. The most rigid adherence to antiquarianism cannot 
compensate for a want of art, when, by another course, really good 
art can be secured. But, as I tell the juries, " This, gentlemen, is a 
matter for your consideration, not mine, and I thank God for it." 

As a matter of general effect, I agree with Marochetti, as I before 
said, and this was not a new idea to me, for it came across me on 
seeing the cathedral. But, if the Committee think otherwise, if any 
warning of mine is of any weight, let me impress most strongly on 

their minds that the employment of can only lead to utter 

failure ; even supposing they should consent to paying for artistic 

superintendence in the manner proposed. knows little about 

any sort of glass-painting, and of an early style he knows no 
more than a child, and his friend even less. He has no idea of 
the principle upon which the old windows are composed, or of the 
defects in their composition ; he does not understand the means of 
remedying those defects; but as I see that he has already made 
an impression on some of the Committee, I should not be surprised 
if, after all, he succeeded, and that the progress of glass-painting 
remained where it was, if the Committee hesitate at all about send- 
ing the matter abroad. However, I have said all I can, and I can 
only add to the formal words, " Gentlemen, consider your verdict," 
mind, if you are wrong, there can be no such thing as granting a 
new trial. 

Believe me very truly^yours, 

C. Winston. 



My DEAR Wilson, Temrle, 16tb March, 1857. 

I have been reading the report as carefi lly as if it were a 
special plea, and I think it admirable ; nor does anything at present 
occur to me that would do anything else than weaken what you have 
so pointedly put. 

If the Royal factory at Munich will execute the whole of the 
windows at 21. a foot, by all means embrace their offer; for you 
will by this means secure a homogeneity which can be effected by 
no other means. It was the idea of employing different artists 
(foreigners), hinted at in the report, which I disliked, but I came 
over to it, as a matter of necessity, which is the way in which the 
report puts it. 

I say, by all means throw antiquarianism overboard, if it and 
art are not capable of a union under existing circumstances. I am 


so used to associate the brilliant and powerful hues of the thirteenth 
century with the designs of that period, that the latter would lose 
all interest in my eyes if unaccompanied with what I consider the 
essential condition to their good eifect — glass of similar texture to 
that of the thirteenth century — and, therefore, as an antiquary, I 
shoidd most strongly recommend, in the event of the Munich artists 
being employed, the adoption of a style as late as that of the early 
part of the sixteenth or end of the fifteenth century (which does not 
exclude the use of medallions), because I feel persuaded that this 
style will best harmonize with their workmanship. To-day I am 
not busy, so I shall make the attempt to see Mr. Stirling by calling 
on him. 

Very truly yours, 

C. Winston. 


My DEAR WlLSON, Temple, 25th March, 1857. 

I have carefully read your last letter, and I have come to the 
same conclusion that you have done, viz. that we both mean the 
same thing, though our modes of expressing slightly differ. As to 
what you say of, as it were, striking out a new style of treatment, it 
is precisely what I meant when I wrote that book, ' An Inquiry 
into the Difference in Style in Painted Glass.' I had not looked at 
it for years till last night, when I read through the chapter beginning 
at p. 268. I was surprised to find how little of it I should wish 
altered, were it now to be rewritten ; and I am pleased at this, and 
to observe that your thoughts, working from a different point, have 
tended so nearly to the same conclusion ; because that chapter in 
particular exposed me to the censure and misrepresentation of the 
earnest men. I wish you would just run your eye over it ; it is very 
short. I am quite sensible that the having been steeped in anti- 
quarianism has to a certain extent obscured my judgment. I feel it 
more than I can express ; if you could read my thoughts you would 
be astonished how much my mode of thinking is fettered by this 
sort of learning ; but I am the more willing to follow the advice of 

I made the second sketch with the circles, more for the sake of 
contrast than as indicating the sort of design I should myself prefer ; 
and T think the only point on which there is the least difference 
between us is, the use of a plain, deep-coloured ground of colour, 
where anything is represented which conveys a greater idea of 
depth than a mere group of figures — as a landscape or a canopy. At 
the same time, I confess I see no difference in principle between 


putting a group of figures, arranged on the arc of a semicircle, on a 
stiff, deep-coloured ground, and a similar group with a canopy over 
it, as in your sketches ; and yet to my eye it does not appear to 
be right. But I should like to have your opinion upon it. "\\ hether 
it is that seeing the ground at A, 1 and again seeing the ground at B, 
with the dark soffit C between, makes one "at once suppose that it is 
sky, and not a mere coloured ground, I know not. But I confess, 
whenever I see a canopy thus represented, I always long to take a 
sponge and wash out the ground, till it becomes as light as the blue 
sky-colour used in the glass-paintings of the fifteenth and sixteenth 
centuries. In the Brussels glass, the sky-blue ground within the 
arches, which breaks the figures, is as light as the sky, so that here 
there is no violation of probability ; at the same time, one regards 
groups in panels (as in some of Baphael's works), backed by a deep- 
coloured ground, with complacency. Is not this the reason that, in 
the latter case, conventionality is not too forced, in the former it is ? 
This has been a great puzzle to me a long while, for I am sure that 
in matters of taste it does not do to fetter oneself by what is called 
" a principle." In the earliest glass one does not observe the defect, 
owing, I suppose, to the very conventional manner in which the 
canopies are represented, not unlike the archways one sees in 
the Koman bas-reliefs ; but in proportion as the canopy becomes 
more natural — as in Decorated work, for instance — it always seems 
to me that the deep-coloured ground becomes more obviously wrong. 
I think the artists of the sixteenth century must have felt some mis- 
givings on this point, for I do not know of a single instance in which 
depth is forced upon one's mind by architectural lines or by a land- 
scape, or by anything in short which carries one's eyes beyond the 
group, that the back colour does not recede by its lightness. At 
the same time, they got a great deal of stiff, deep colour by putting 
the head of their canopy-work on a stiff ground, so as to give the 
idea of the picture being framed in stiff' ornament. 

Yours very truly, 

C. Winston. 


My dear Wilson, Temple, 6th April, 1857. 

Many thanks for your most interesting and valuable commu- 
nication. I had suspected that there must have been some corre- 
sponding practice in other branches of art ; but your note is conclusive, 
and I shall deposit it in a place where I keep valuable documents. 

1 This refers to a sketch in the letter. 


I see no objection to such a canopy as you suggest, but then pains 
must be taken to make it appear to stand for no more than it pro- 
fesses to be. I am certain that the mediaeval examples had their 
origin in pure ignorance. They did not give the projection of the 
hood, because they did not know how ; and they did not show 
the recess of the niche, for a similar reason. I have several examples 
showing abortive attempts at perspective, or even of shading the 
interior of the niche, which, I think, quite bear out what I say, that 
it was ignorance, and ignorance alone, that occasioned the use of 
canopies so treated. This is not an uncommon form of fourteenth- 
century canopy-work, — which is certainly intended to represent a 
real spire. 1 The Early English canopies are the same in principle, 
though, owing to their greater simplicity, one hardly sees it at first. 
The great thing to guard against in these matters is the over- 
stepping the bounds of conventionality, and for this reason I have 
hitherto preferred panels, ostensibly such, to any other species of 
decoration ; yet I do not see any reason why the conventionality of a 
panel ought to be extended ; only, as I said before, it must be done 
with judgment, not in the way some modern lights would have 
it done. 

Yours most truly, 

C. Winston. 


18th May, 1857. 
[The first part of this letter is wanting.] 
I feel almost certain that the only modification the foreign design 
is capable of would be in the form of the ornament. I do not think 
it would be any improvement ; for the German foliage is broader 
than the thirteenth century, and therefore more suitable to a poor 
material ; but you might contrive to shade the foliage of the thir- 
teenth century naturally, like drawings taken from the existing 
bosses in Glasgow Cathedral, and so, perhaps, one would do as well 
as the other. But I question whether anything would satisfy critics, 
short of imitating not merely the drawing, but the simple mode of 
execution of the thirteenth century. I know what an uproar was 
raised against Nixon's window in Westminster Abbey, where the 
ornament is copied from that of the sculpture of the thirteenth cen- 
tury, giving natural shadows, &c. 

A sketch in the margin. 



[No date, but apparently written May, 1857.] 
The adoption of a later style would by no means necessitate 
any alteration in the general plan of a design; the groups could, 
I think, he put in medallions, hut the character of the ornament 
would he more refined than that of the thirteenth century, and the 
colouring broader. The south transept of Angers Cathedral in 
France perfectly illustrates my views. There is a circular window 
there, the stone-work of which is of the thirteenth century, but the 
glazing is of the fifteenth : and it is worthy of remark that the 
general arrangement of the glazing is so exactly in accordance 
with a design of the thirteenth century, that it is clear it must have 
been copied from it, only such alterations being made in the detail as 
would bring it into the style of the fifteenth century in this respect. 
I think, if this suggestion were adopted, you would completely 
obtain the benefit of an early fourteenth-century design, and at the 
same time introduce nothing which would not completely accord 
with the practice of the modern Munich glass-painters. I may, 
perhaps, be too straitlaced in my views, but this is the only point 
that has occurred to me worth mentioning. 

Yours faithfully, 

C. Winston. 


DEAR WlLSON, Temple, 24th May, 1857. 

I have been at work from 10 till 3 to-day, making the drawing 
I enclose, for which I trust you will give me absolution for not 
having been to church. I see many things wrong, and I should 
like to do it all over again, but I really have no time, and therefore 
I send it to you with all its imperfections on its head, as I know you 
to be a good-natured critic. 

I think it right on principle ; at least it expresses generally all 
that I mean. And now I will give up my authorities. First, the 
idea of dividing a window into panels is taken from one of the clear- 
story windows at Bourges. I do not think there is any print of it 
extant, but my note says that the window is thus divided. 1 

The forms of panels I have adopted are from recollection of earl}' 
tracery; and you will see something of the same sort in your 
windows at Glasgow, only the patterns there, I thought, would not 
do for glass, if exactly copied ; some are so, as you will see on looking 
at the plate in your report. 

1 A sketch is inserted in this letter. 


The way of getting colour in (red) is shown in a window from 
Trumpington, near Cambridge, temp. 1290, of which I have a 

The border is treated just like some of those splendid Cinquecento 
ones at St. Peter's, Cologne, of which there is a notable example at 
Lichfield. Now the drawing on it could be easily taken from Early 
English scrollwork. I made the pattern a little too dark at first, 
and had to scratch it off, which, by the way, gives exactly the effect 
of a Cinquecento border that has suffered from age. 

The scroll-work wants a great deal, of amendment 

You must in charity accept the principal figure as an antique. I 
sketched it merely to show the sort of drapeiy I mean, which is so 
much more severe than that of the fifteenth century. Badly as I 
have done it, it puts the unhappy mediaeval at top to shame, and 
shows, I think, to what quarter we ought to have recourse for 

I have coloured the whole thing as rawly as I could, in order, as 
far as possible, to give the effect of modern glass, but with all my 
pains I fear I have coloured it more powerfully than the glass. Bnt 
on looking at it carefully, the only thing I think I have been guilty 
of is, colouring the red deeper, perhaps, than it can be made to look 
in glass. However, this can be diapered in execution, and, without 
thinking of it, I was trying to give the effect of a diaper. 

I beg to say that the shield at bottom is not a bib too big, for an 
archaeologist at least. 

Yours ever, 

C. Winstox. 

P.S. — You must not expect to find any precedent of an old window 
like what I have sketched. 1 have only followed the old designs in 
principle. This is on the same principle as the ordinary figure and 
canopy windows, only the divisions are made with more panels, as in 
the medallion windows, so that the design is a union of both. 

I am convinced that you cannot make a design severe enough by 
foliage alone ; there must be decided forms. Ward and Nixon tried 
it repeatedly, and always failed like the rest. Foliage alone would 
do well for that beautiful German design, but then he has got 
solidity by his white ground in the spandrils at bottom. Mind, 
I still greatly prefer his design. This is only for a pis aller. None 
of the important parts of my sketch will ever run together ; the 
ornaments— the scrolls I mean — may in some places, but this will 
not signify, as their chief use is to produce an effect of colour. You 
will find no such thin lines of white, against thin lines of yellow, as 
in that figure and canopy sketch you sent. 



My dear Wilson', Temple, 11th June, 1857. 

I have not had time to look at your MS. ; but the little 
pamphlet I have read with great satisfaction and profit, It is 
wonderful how you have hit the nail in saying that the employers 
ought to go to school. If the upper classes had but a little art 
instruction, we should not see glass-painting in England in so 
utterly a disgraceful state. 

I agree with you most cordially in your condemnation of Gothic 
forms. The Houses of Parliament displease most antiquaries, 
because not one particle of the decoration is really like old — 
it is neither one thing nor the other. It has all the spirit of old 
work taken out of it. It is, in short, jemmy-Gothic* — the only 
expression which adequately conveys an idea of the Gothic of the 
nineteenth century. 

The Gothic designs for the Government offices are bad ; and the 
best of it is, that without a single exception they are all taken from 
foreign Gothic ! So much for those who object to Italian as an 
exotic. Indeed the Italian designs have it all their own way ; and 
mediaevalism is signally defeated in the opinion of every one whom 
I have seen. 

Yours very truly, 

C. Winston. 


My DEAR WILSON, Temple, 18th June, 1857. 

j\I r- ]\i came here to-day, bringing with him a design 

of Capronnier's, with which he seemed much smitten, and the 
sketch you had made from the little rough sketch I sent. I told 
him that Capronnier's was far too mosaic in its character to produce 
any good effect in modern glass. Your sketch was already marked 
" Not approved. B. Hall," at which I was not surprised, for you 
had retained the fifteenth-century figure, instead of a thirteenth- 
century or a Greek one, as I had indicated. But as it seems 
decided that there are to be no more crypt-windows, for fear of 
making the place too dark, it does not much signify. But I want 
particularly to call your attention to studying the subject most 

No good can be done with regard to the main windows without 

1 See note, p. 27. 


making some of those Munich people come over and see the building ; 
and then you must try and indoctrinate them with the principle, 
that what is wanted is a nineteenth-century design fit for nine- 
teenth-century glass, hut at the same time harmonizing with a 
thirteenth or fourteenth-century building. And to do this you 
must yourself study the subject ; for without you I do not know 
where the Committee will be. . . . 

Yours truly, 

C. Winston. 


My DEAR WlLSON, Temple, 26th June, 1857. 

I wrote a very hurried note to you last evening, just as I 
was going out to dinner ; and on reading your note more carefully 
afterwards, I perceive that I have not answered your argument as 
carefully as I could have done. 

No doubt, if common sense alone were to he our guide, we should 
wish the windows to be done in the style with which the artist is 
most familiar, and which no douht in this particular case is very 
much adapted to the only material we can procure to work upon. 
This was the universal practice in the middle ages. Every work, 
whether a restoration, an addition, or an embellishment, was done 
in the style of the time, without the least reference to the style of 
any other period ; and the success of the mediaeval works depends, 
I believe, almost entirely on the freedom thus accorded to the artist. 
But in these days we seek to make up for the loss of all original 
artistic power by a display of archaeological learning. There is no 
use to attempt to stem the stream ; all that we can hope to do is to 
give it a harmless direction. 

We know that late German work is best suited to the modern 
material ; but we also know that the archaeologists would be in 
arms at what they- would call such a violation of style as to put 
late fifteenth-century work into the windows of a thirteenth-century 
building. Therefore, as we are too wise to have imitations of the 
glass of the thirteenth century— knowing that such designs would 
produce a worse effect than the modern German, if executed in the 
modern material — we have recourse to a compromise which shall 
satisfy the archaeologist, as far as such a thing can be done without 
relinquishing our own principle. And therefore we say, make your 
design broad and highly finished to suit the material, but let the 
forms employed resemble as nearly as possible the forms used in 
the architecture and art of the thirteenth century, in order to 
satisfy the archaeologists. No doubt these forms must all undergo 

d 2 


a considerable change in order to enable the work to be executed 
softly and broadly ; bnt still the whole object of adopting such 
forms at all is to exhibit a resemblance between the old architec- 
ture and its modern embellishment; and therefore it is that I am 
unable to see how we could answer to the archaaologists if we 
adopted forms of ornament a good deal resembling forms of orna- 
ment in the thirteenth century, and yet declined to admit the use 
of forms of drapery a good deal resembling forms of drapery in the 
thirteenth centurv. 


Dear Wilsox, Temple, 15th August, 1857. 


If any advance is to be made, it must be by employing the best 
artists in glass that can be got ; and the best artists are unques- 
tionably the Munich glass-painters. There is no one artist of the 
English school so far superior to the others as to render his employ- 
ment a matter in the propriety of which all must concur. So far 
from it, if one English glass-painter were employed, it would be 
very difficult to deny the propriety of employing others; and if 
one or two were employed, why should not all, when the shades 
of difference between them are so slight? I am sure of this, — if 
once the question is opened, and the prestige of the Munich school 
given up, it will be all up with the Committee and everybody 

I entirely agree that the Munich school is not by an}- means 
perfect ; it is rather a school of art in the abstract than of art as 
applied to painted glass ; and I sa}-, as I always have said, that in 
point of execution Hedgeland's work at Norwich, and Nixon's at 
Christchuroh, Bloomsbury, are more glass-like, and therefore more 
correct, than any of the Munich work. But, then, what is gained 
in technical excellence is lost in art; and considering that the 
lesson most needed to be inculcated on the English glass-painters 
is, that glass-painting ought to be artistical, I think, on the 
whole, that it is better to have art without transparency than 
transparency without art. I agree with Mr. Petit, that it seems 
hard that so large a place as Glasgow Cathedral should be given up 
to the Germans ; but the question is, how is the thing to be carried 
through practically? Your subscribers will not w r ait ten or twelve 
years for an English school to develop itself: nothing will satisfy 
them but to fill the windows at once. It would therefore be im- 
possible to leave a part of the cathedral blank fur the reception of 
English glass when English artists shall be found able to execute 
it in a style of art as high as the Germans. So there is nothing 


for it but to fill the whole cathedral with foreign glass, and to con- 
sider that by so doing a great step forward has been made ; and to 
leave it to others to give opportunity for a display of improvement 
upon the Germans. 

My own private impression is, that Marochetti and Ward might, 
with the new glass, execute the whole thing in a way greatly 
superior to tbe Germans ; but I could not venture to recommend 
the experiment, for experiment it would be. 

To show how sincere I am in this, I will mention what I am 
about in regard to the two new Temple windows, small and insig- 
nificant as they are as compared with your great work. We have 
got the glass perfect as a material. It is as fine as any old glass 
ever was; and I am certain that the ornamentation and general 
arrangement are right in reference to the position of the windows 
and the style of the building ; but then I know that the groups will 
be failures— that is, they will not be so high in point of art, as the 
glass is excellent in colour, and the design correct. As money was 
no object to me, I did very seriously think of commissioning Maro- 
chetti to design the groups ; but, though I have the greatest con- 
fidence in him, I, on consideration, came to the conclusion that the 
time had not yet arrived, and that it was better for me to work out 
the problem on which I am engaged, in the way in which I am 
certain that it must be worked out, with such resources as I pos- 
sessed, instead of risking a total failure through Marochetti's mis- 
understanding my drift. 

It would be affectation to conceal the fact that I feel my own 
strength as an archaeologist. For twenty-five years and more I 
have been doing just what 3 r ou are now doing — working hard at the 
subject critically — and therefore I have a right to entertain strong 
convictions ; but Marochetti also would have a right to question 
these convictions, and it would be useless for me to attempt to 
argue the subject with him until he had himself likewise studied 
it. I can only convince him by an appeal to his e3 r e-sight ; and 
therefore I have thought it better to. try to express nry meaning 
clumsily, in the hope that hereafter I may be able, through his 
assistance, to see the thing property carried out, than to waste more 
of m3' life in arguments which it is beyond the power of language to 
express so clearly as to exclude the possibility of their being mis- 
understood. If, therefore, I do not choose to risk a total failure in 
a small thing like this, you may easily understand my want of 
courage to recommend such a course to you. . ■ . . 

Therefore I say, stick to Munich, and be content that Glasgow 
shall be regarded as the cradle of that (superior to German) school 
of glass-painting which it is Mr. Petit's as well as your and my 
wish to see flourishing in this country. 

I have gone to such a length that I have no time to caution you 


against some hasty conclusions, in respect of the naturalness of the 
Decorated style, into which you seem to he fallen. I will write 

Yours truly, 

C. W. 


Dear Wilson, Temple, 18th August, 1857. 


The style of your ornamentation must, in my opinion, be regu- 
lated by the texture of your material ; for if there is one point more 
thoroughly established than another in point of fact, it is that in 
ancient glass the style of the ornamentation and treatment of the 
material varied with the texture of the material. And this was 
artistic enough, because a powerful material neither required, nor in- 
deed would show, any very delicate ornamentation or soft shading ; 
whereas a weaker sort of glass required more painter's manipula- 
tion to give it force ; and paintings executed in it in the same simple 
way as the earlier ones would have looked thin and miserable. 

I have been very much amused at noticing, throughout the 
notes on glass you lent me, your complaint of the want of half- 
tint. Of course you are right ; and the reason was, that in every 
one of the glass-paintings you were criticising they had ignorantly 
used, along with the simple mode of execution practised in the 
thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, a kind of glass far more pel- 
lucid and flimsy in texture than the glass of those centuries, or 
indeed than the glass of the fifteenth century, in which one always 
sees a great amount of half-tint. The Geunans, being artists, and 
knowing how very pellucid is the ordinary material, have used 
more shadow in their glass-paintings than one sees in any old 
glass-painting ; and perhaps they have gone a little too far in this 
respect ; and it is in reference to the probability of the work being 
executed in Germany that I wished to make these suggestions to 
Mr. S and yourself. 

1 think that the character of the windows demands small pictures 
in medallions, whether consisting of groups or single figures. But, 
supposing that the artists of the fifteenth century had had to fill the 
window, and supposing that they had taken it into their heads to 
follow the more ancient designs (as was actually clone by them in 
the south Eose of Angers Cathedral in France, and in the window 
of Conway church in Wales), they would have followed the ancient 
design only in general, and would have worked out all the details 
according to their own practice. Thus, they would have used 


a great deal more of tertiary colours, broader draperies, broader 
ornaments, thinner lines, and more soft shades ; though they 
would have retained the general arrangement of the design, the 
same general relation of the picture part to the ornamental part, 
the same general forms of panels, &c. But the effect, owing to the 
weaker nature of the material, might have been weaker than the 
older design ; yet, owing to the harmony between the nature of 
the material and the mode of working it, the window would have 
looked only more delicate than the old one — not more flimsy than 
the old one, as our modern antiques do 

Then as regards other matters. There is nothing really new in 
the glass arrangements of the fourteenth century, as compared with 
those of the thirteenth, except those necessitated by the employ- 
ment of mullioned windows. Thus, tracery-lights were a novelty, 
but the general design is borrowed from the Early English medal- 
lion ; so also is the carrying a group of figures beyond the limits 
of a single light ; but the prototype of this was the carrying a 
subject through two or more medallions in an Early English window. 

The great feature of Decorated glass is the use of the canopy 
over the figure or group ; but the thirteenth-century artists also 
used canopies (over single figures, and rarely over groups). But 
this use of the canopy is the very worst part of their practice ; for 
the canopy is rather an oddly-terminated panel than a niche ; and 
though I see no objection to canopies in the abstract, still I cannot 
but regard the use of the canopy in Decorated work, unimproved, 
as a strong proof of feeble art, it being so easy to cover a space 
with something like a tabernacle, as compared with the difficulty 
of arranging figures or groups in panels, as in the Early English 
medallion windows. 

Then in the scrolls. The Early English, though taken from 
Boman work, are perfectly original ; and they are rich and varied, 
and present to my mind a favourable contrast to the miserable 
tendril (and most unnatural, because in some respects copied from 
nature) scrolls of the Decorated period. This sort of scrolls, with- 
out the least effort, are capable of indefinite extension. There is 
rarely that subordination of the smaller coils to the bigger ones, 
w r hich, as in Greek scroll-work, was so carefully attended to in 
Early English work. 

The colouring of the glass — I mean the tint of individual pieces 
— was best in the twelfth century. It slightly deterioiated in the 
early part of the thirteenth, and continued with little variation 
until about 1370, when it very greatly altered for the worse. This 
close identity of colour makes it difficult sometimes to distinguish 
the white-pattern Decorated windows from the Early English white- 
pattein windows ; but a closer inspection shows the superiority of 
the latter 


My own impression of Decorated glass is, that in some instances, 
and those invariably the earlier ones, one finds it as good nearly as 
the Early English, but that in the great majority of cases it is 
greatly inferior. 

The best Decorated work is, however, about the date of your own 
Cathedral — the latter part of the reign of Edward I. This glass is 
transitional in character, Early English and Decorated details often 
occurring in the same window : sometimes in the same building, 
and in glass of the same age, one window has all its details, its 
scroll-work, &c, Early English, the other Decorated. And it was 
seeing this, and thereby that greater variety and go in the ornament 
might be ensured by adopting Early English details, that, on the 
whole, I thought you would do well to borrow from the Early 
English rather than from the Decorated style. Still, either would 
do. But if you did adopt the Early English, it would be a wise 
precaution to give a little more Greek character to the figures, and 
not, as is done by the old artists, to adopt the same style of figures 
without regard to the ornament : not that there need be much dif- 
ference in the figures — not more than one sees between Nicholas 
Pisano's work and the Early English of the middle of the thirteenth 

I think the Early English medallion is on the whole the most 
correct in point of principle when deep glass is going to be used ; 
and the Decorated panel is so nearly alike that this would do as 
well. But I do not like canopies. I still think that an arrange- 
ment of panels, large enough to include single figures four feet high, 
will be the best thing, using Decorated or Early English ornament 
as you like. The shallower antiquaries would of course prefer the 
Decorated. But, as I have shown, you have your option. In speak- 
ing of Early English or thirteenth-century ornament, I do not 
mean that of the twelfth, of which there is much figured in the 
Bourges Book. All that from Sens and Canterbury there deli- 
neated is of the twelfth century 

I have spun an outrageous long yarn. I only wish you were 
here to see the examples with which I can exemplify it. 

Yours very truly, 

C. Winston. 


My DEAR WlLSON, Ehyl, Flintshire, 1st Sept. 1857. 

I return your lecture, which is excellent, and if it gets into 
print I wish you would send me a copy. 

The only point on which I should be inclined to ditfer from what 


you say, as it stands, is where you appear to me to ratber too broadly 
class Cinquecento glass-paintings with tbose of a later style. I 
agree with you that the flatness of a wall-decoration is a thing not 
to be disregarded. But what I say is this, — there is no harm in 
having a landscape background done sufficiently well to tell its 
story, provided it is not so perfectly done as to produce illusion. 
Eaphael's cartoons are, therefore, proper for wall-decorations, be- 
cause, though the} 7 do represent objects in more than one plane, the 
representation, though amply sufficient for its purpose, is yet not 
carried to such a pitch as to destroy the flatness of the wall, as might 
have been the case if the landscape had been carried out to the pitch 
of some of Turner's. And so with regard to painted glass : if the 
artists are content to use coloured glass, and only enamel brown and 
the j'ellow stain, as the Cinquecento artists did, I defy them to 
produce so close an imitation of nature as shall prove illusive, and 
so destroy the wall-line, though nature shall yet be so far imitated 
as to render it unnecessary for the artist to write on the background 
" This is a landscape ;" whereas, if enamel colouring is used, land- 
scapes may be so accurately represented as to be illusive, as in some 
of the Munich glass in Cologne Cathedral. I grant that, if the prin- 
ciple is a rigid one, the Cinquecento artists are wrong. But my 
experience of law makes me indifferent to the charge of things being 
contrary to principle, even in art ; for how often does it turn out 
that truth resides in an exception to a principle ! In other words, 
what are often called principles are, in fact, nothing but general 
rules — highly useful when treated as general rules, but which, 
when relied on as principles, are too often found to prove mere 
dogmas, resting on too narrow a foundation. 

Yours truly, 

C. Winston. 


My BEAR WlLSON, Swan, Wolverhampton, 17th Sept. 1857. 

My holidays are over, and I am holding the courts of this 
district till the end of October, when I return to town. 

I have seen more than a usual quantity of modern glass during 
my late peregrinations in England and Wales, and certainly, if 
an} T thing, the art has lowered even during the last year 

Yesterday I had a blank day, which I partly filled up by a walk 

to B , where is a window by , which I think he wanted 

you to see. Certainly, as times go, it is a very commendable work ; 
but its chief merit, if I am not greatly mistaken, consists in its being 
constructed of the new material, which certainly gives it a substance 
and tone which one looks for in vain in ordinary modern works. 


The window is a white pattern window of three lights, with two 
medallions, containing pictures, in each light. The window itself 
is early Edw. II., and the style of the glass is unexceptionable. 
The figures are very well drawn. The east window of the south 
aisle of the same church is by . It is also a white pattern win- 
dow of five lights, with two medallions in each light. The figures 
displease me ; yet, making allowance for the difference of material, 

's being of ordinary glass, I confess I saw but very little to 

choose between the two windows when seen from a distance. And 
this proves the wisdom of your objection to small groups of figures. 
A t a distance one sees nothing but a congeries of bits of glass, and 
one judges of the window merely as of a coloured pattern, without 
regard to drawing ; and this, I fancy, is the reason that educated 
men so often talk without disgust of modern windows, the artistic 
part of which is considerably below zero. 1 am, therefore, more 
than ever persuaded of the truth of your views that the Glasgow 
windows should be filled with groups and single figures of as large 
a size as the conditions imposed by the heavy mullions in the win- 
dows will admit, and consequently that Hubner's idea of the general 
arrangement is the right one, and that your aim should be to modify 
this arrangement in conformity with the requirements of the anti- 
quarian critics. 

How completely one sees in all this that the Gothic is not the 
architectural style for the nineteenth century ! It may present its 
broad masses, but they are cut up into small parts — a truly barbaric 
feature. "With a religion at once simple and sublime, one would 
think common sense would suggest for its service a style far more 
allied to the Greek than the Gothic — a style admitting of broad 
square masses, yet of varied outline, of which one sees the most 
wonderful hints at every turn in the furnaces, the forges, the ware- 
houses, and mills, that cover the coalfields here. I am satisfied that 
I could soon fill a sketch-book with some of the most excellent ideas 
that can be conceived from these rough blocks. Well, some day, I 
suppose, people will come to their senses, and then we shall see art 
flourish. In the interim all its votaries must try to push it as far as 
their chains will allow. 

Yours very truly, 

C. Winston. 


My dkar Wilson, October, 1857. 

My object in writing is to put you on your guard against 
supposiug that the Decorated style is, in this country at least, and 
especially in painted glass, a more progressive style than the Early 


English ; though I do not see that this question has much practical 
hearing on the matter in hand. All my researches tend to the con- 
clusion that the pure Byzantine style ended about 1170, about 
which period the commencement of modern art may be dated. No 
doubt, in some respects, as in the formation of the eye, you see the 
influence of Byzantine art until the early part of the fourteenth 
century ; but then these peculiarities were succeeded by other con- 
ventionalities even further removed from nature ; and upon the 
whole I should say that, in drawing and expression, mediaeval art 
reached its perfection about the middle of the thirteenth century, 
and continued in a declining state until it arose again to perfection 
in the sixteenth century. Nothing can be worse than the figure- 
drawing in the glass-paintings of even as early a period as the reign 
of Edward II. They are most abominable conventionalisms, entirely 
devoid of that go which one sees so clearly in the roughest works of 
the first half of the thirteenth centuiy. The faces are flat and un- 
interesting, the attitudes contorted and affected, and the draperies 
heavy and so full of large folds as to utterly fail to suggest the idea 
of there being a human body underneath. I have no doubt that it 
is the bad art of the decorated figures and glass generally that makes 
the Decorated period so great a favourite with our enlightened 
glasswrights. 1 know from experience that it takes double the time 
and trouble to copy an Early English figure, generally, that it does 
to copy a Decorated one. Still no doubt in the early part of the 
fourteenth century, or latter part of the thirteenth, there is some 
fine work, not unlike the style of Nicholas Pisano ; but this soon 
went out, and was succeeded by the conventional style I have 

The Early English, as it appears to me, is a development of the 
ancient Greek style, possessing, with much of its grace, a great deal 
of a different feeling altogether, which one sees in its perfect develop- 
ment in the works of Baphael. No doubt, here and there, one meets 
with figures in which the Byzantine type was more strictly adhered 
to, especially in the representations of our Lord, and these are the 
works which are given on a large scale in the Bourges Book ; but I 
can assure you these are the exceptions and not the rule, and that 
there is more varied expression, more natural movement, and in- 
finitely more dignity in the figures of the thirteenth-century glass- 
paintings up to about 1270, than there is at any subsequent period ; 
and I think it is so in the sculpture. The figures on the south door- 
way at Lincoln, figured in Flaxman's work on sculpture, are as early 
as the middle of the thirteenth centuiy, and it is astonishing how 
fine, like the Greek, and yet how much less conventional and natural, 
are their draperies ; whereas the sculpture in the Angel choir, which 
is about twenty-five years later, is inferior, though certainly fine. 
There are the thick-folded draperies and the flat faces that one sees 


in the later work. Cockerell says that these are the finest of the 
two ; but I doubt if you would think so if you compared the originals 
together. I know it is a great deal easier to draw the choir figures 
than those of the south door, which to me is a strong proof that there 
is more in the latter than in the former ; and so it is in the French 
sculpture. The best is about the middle of the thirteenth century ; 
after this it becomes mannered, just as ours does. I grant that there 
is a very Greek feeling in the thirteenth-century draperies ; but those 
of the fourteenth only show what things must come to when there is 
no standard of excellence present to the eye of the sculptor, or pre- 
served in his mind by the influence of tradition. It was Greek art 
that elevated the mediaeval artists of the thirteenth centuiy, just as 
it did the mediaeval artists of the sixteenth ; it was the absence of 
Greek art, or of the tradition of it, that caused the mediaeval artists 
to flounder on in the most outrageous and unnatural conventionality, 
from the latter part of the thirteenth century till the beginning of 
the sixteenth ; yet the thirteenth- century art is not Byzantine— it is 
mediaeval art, sublimated by the traditions of the Byzantine. 
[The remainder of this letter (which is without date) is wanting.] 


My DKAR Wilson, Rhyl. Flintshire, 8th Nov. 1857. 

I have completed my work in the courts, and I am here airing 
myself till Tuesday, when I go on a visit to Shrewsbury, and thence 
to London on Saturday ; and as idleness is the root of mischief, I 
propose to give you a chapter on Dirt, if that is not a misnomer, 
the authoritative definition of the subject being " matter in the 
wrong place." 

The question of "la patina" has engaged my attention for some 
time, and the conclusion I have long since arrived at is precisely 
the same as Mr. Ainmiiller's. No manipulation that would not be 
destructive of the painting will produce the same broken effect that 
time produces. For instance, you may diaper the glass as cleverly 
as possible, yet it will look flat and hard, unless you make the 
ground of the diaper deeper or lighter in places quite irregularly, 
irrespective of the pattern. So with regard to shadows or anything 
else : the effect of age is plus all efforts of art : it softens what would 
otherwise be harsh, without necessarily impairing the painting. This 
is exemplified in those windows at King's College, Cambridge, which 
have been cleaned. The black dirt which obscured or interfered 
with the painting has been removed ; but the lighter discoloration, 
the beeswing of age, still remains and softens all the flat parts ; and 
the difficulty has always been how to produce this admirable effect 


by artificial means. At Ely Cathedral you must have observed many 
wonderful efforts of genius in this particular ; but that they should 
have all failed is not surprising, when you perceive that the mode 
of applying the dirt is precisely the reverse of nature's. 

In all English and French glass that I have seen antiquated, the 
process has been to bedaub the whole individual piece, and then to 
rub away some of the dirt in the centre of the piece ; whereas nature 
bedaubs the centre of the piece, leaving, in general, a considerable 
space near the leads, all round the edges, comparatively clear. The 
effect in the former case is, when the pieces of glass are very small, 
to make the whole design look as if it were greasy — as if it were 
made up of lumps of different-coloured fats, each lump having its 
own proper high light, like the little dumplings one sees swimming 
about in mutton-broth ; whilst the effect in the latter case is to 
impart that sparkling brilliancy which is so much admired. I will 
make on the next sheet a diagram of the two methods, A being the 
first, B the second. 

I have tried all sorts of ways to produce the effect B on glass, 
without the smallest success, until it suddenly occurred to me that 
if something could be applied to glass, after it had been leaded 
together, and which would stick without being burned, at all events 
one would have the advantage of applying the stuff judiciously in 
those parts, and in such proportions as would produce the best 
effect, in the same way as I touch up my own drawings, after they 
are otherwise finished, with a view to produce the effect of " la 
patina," which process seems so greatly to have pleased Maro- 
chetti ; and then I recollected I had seen mortar adhering to glass, 
which probably had been there 400 or 500 years, as may often be 
observed in tracery lights : so I thought I would try, and the effect 
was perfect. The projection of the leads prevented the brush from 
touching the glass near the edges of the different pieces, which 
therefore remained clear, except where accidentally splashed ; whilst 
I could apply the composition at pleasure, exactly as I touched up 
my own drawings. 

The next improvement was to use hydraulic lime instead of common 
lime, because the magnesia in it would occasion a better set, and so 
prevent the mortar being washed off. Indeed, mortar of this kind 
cannot be removed, when once set, except by weak acid purposely 
applied. I found a brush, like a paste-brash or flat varnish- brush, 
about an inch wide, was the best instrument for applying the 
mortar, which last ought to be in a rather more liquid state than 
that in which it is used in bricklayer's work. The whiteness of the 
mortar could easily be corrected by dusting the work over with a 
little soot or lampblack, after the operation is completed. The best 
way is to turn the glass upon the easel, so that the outside of it 


is next you, to which, in preference to the painted side, the dirt 
should be applied. 

This dirtying is of little use unless the material itself resembles 
the old in texture. When it does, I cannot tell the old from the 
new, the imitation of "la patina" being so exact. Any window 
that is intended to be far from the eye would be improved by a 
slight application, used with judgment and with an artistic eye. 

Here endeth the chapter on Dirt. You will understand I advo- 
cate its use with great caution and art, so as to improve what is 
already good in colour, tone, and drawing, not as a substitute for all 
or any of these things, as some of our glasswrights employ it. 

Yours truly, 

C. AVinston. 


My DEAR Wilsox, 

Since my return home I have been too much engaged to 
write until now. The practice to which you allude of touching up 
painted windows, after they are leaded up, with a colour which is 
not fixed to the glass by burning, and which must fall off as soon as 
the vehicle with which it is mixed loses its tenacity, as it must be 
expected to do within a few years, is one unfortunately too common 
in this country. It is very rarely that one does not detect the 
practice, in any groups of figures at least. AVhen I was Associate 
Juror in the 1851 Exhibition, it fell to my lot to examine very 
carefully all the glass-paintings in the gallery, and I fonnd that 
the practice I have mentioned was not confined to the English, 
but very largely indulged in by the French glass-painters ; but I 
failed to detect it in any of the German glass-paintings, which 
seemed on the whole to be more conscientiously executed than any 
of the others. You may always detect it by throwing the light upon 
the surface of the glass-painting ; you will then see that the touching 
up is of a different colour from the enamel, and of course it can be 
easily scraped off. It will last, according to the vehicle with which 
it is mixed : I dare say that turpentine would last from eighteen to 

twenty years. Mr. touched up his three east windows in our 

church here with common oil paint to give them solidity, which 
peeled off in places in five or six years, and last year it was so bad 
that the windows were this autumn painted over again at the back. 
I think they look worse than they did ; but in two or three years 
they will be uniform in appearance, owing to the peeling off of the 


No glass-painting which owes part of its effect to an application 
of a fleeting nature can be regarded as a sound work. The applica- 
tion of mortar stands on a different footing. This is used merely to 
anticipate the effect of age and to give an artificial " patina," which, 
when the real " patina" forms in other parts, can easily be removed. 

I have seen the two new windows in the Temple Church, and 
they are an excellent lesson. The material itself is perfect, and the 
tone, and colour, and solidity, as good as the old. The design also 
I like, though it could be improved, and the figure-drawing is far in 
advance of that in the other windows ; and upon the whole, as a 
mere antiquary, my experience of the Temple windows has made 
me lean more to Munich than before. But, seriously speaking, 
pray do not commit yourself in any way to anybody until you 
have had further opportunity of looking at the glass at Wells and 

I do so much want to have a talk with you, and indeed I would 
accompany you to Wells ; at all events to Gloucester, and to New 
College, Oxford. Believe me, we have not got to the bottom of this 
subject yet. My notions have much expanded of late. 


My DEAR WILSON, Temple, 26th December, 1857. 

Many thanks for your note and the paper. You have con- 
vinced me that I am wrong on one point, and that I have expressed 
myself too carelessly on another. 

First, when I said that I could not understand how fourteenth- 
century ornament could be made to harmonize with Hubner's figures, 
I quite forgot what you say, that it could be adapted so as to har- 
monize ; in which I quite agree. I had in my mind, at the time I 
wrote, only the fourteenth-century ornament, as it exists, in all its 
stiffness, flatness, and simplicity, and only thought of two styles 
joining, as any two styles would, if employed without modifi- 

Secondly, I did not for one moment mean, however I may have 
expressed myself, to recommend Nicholas Pisano's style as a model, 
except for its sentiment, and for those points in respect of which 
you accept it. What I did mean was this; it is that shallow 
pedantic antiquarianism which constitutes the great stumbling- 
block ; and the subtle way of going to work is, I think, to turn their 
flank, rather than attack their position too openly. Now the style 
of drapery which is always associated with fourteenth-century work 
is a severe close style like that of the Greeks, and not a voluminous 
style like that of Eaphael and the men of the sixteenth century 
generally ; and it was to show what was the exact style of drapery 


that actually was used in the fourteenth century, that I alluded to 
Nicholas Pisano, not for the purpose of copying him, but in order 
that the Germans might see the type of drapery that antiquaries 
would admire, and be in perfect harmony with the architecture, and 
thus be able to select out of the numerous styles of good drapery 
one that came nearest, in its general character, to that of X. Pisano's. 
By this means they might satisfy every artistic requirement, and 
yet at the same time produce a style of drapery severe, close, and 
of thin texture (though not so thin as the real Greek, which har- 
monizes most with the architecture of the thirteenth century), 
which in its general contour would so completely resemble the 
general effect of N. Pisano's as would silence all crotchety cavillers. 
The two most rascally sketches on the other side, the one Greek, the 
other liaphael, will show you what I mean. 

Compare them with any print of Nicholas Pisano's, and you will 
see exactly what I mean. There is a great deal of sixteenth-century 
drapery that would do better than Greek, as being more natural ; 
but I am aware that to an artist this needs only to be hinted to be 
understood. All I fear is, that if the Germans' attention is not 
called to the ordinary type of the fourteenth-century drapery, they 
will adopt something that will be too wide from it, and so give the 
enemies of art cause to blaspheme. If you could see some photo- 
graphs of Decorated sculptured figures, this would even be better 
than a print of N. Pisano's. 

Yours most truly, 

C. Winston. 


My DEAR WlLSOX, Rhyl, Flintshire, 24th March, 1SC0. 

I found your letter and Sir A. Alison's opinion (whereat my 
soul receive th comfort) on my return here from, I think, the worst 
expedition in respect of rain, wind, and snow amongst the mountains 
that has ever fallen to the lot of man to endure since Hannibal passed 
the Alps. The only compensation was the magnitude of the water- 
falls, some of which were really splendid. I hope to be back in 
London on Thursday next, when I will address myself to the devout 
meditation of your lecture. 

I am afraid what you say is too true as to the influence of easel- 
painting on glass-painting, and the taste for pretty effects instead of 
great and broad ones. But I do not quite follow you in your argument 
about monumental art. No doubt you are perfectly right in saying 
that the old glass -painters did not scribble about principles, nor did 
any old artists. They did the thing, and left it to smaller folks to 


discourse — often very absurdly — about the principles, or supposed 
principles, upon which they acted. 

After the thirteenth century (the medallion era) I believe that all the 
old glass-painters were as wrong on principle as the poor Cinquecento 
glass-painters who have been so abused. The only difference between 
them was this, — the old fellows stuck their saints under niches, 
or backed by a landscape, into the holes provided for them by the 
tracery, and cared little if figures cheek-by-jowl were drawn to 
different scales. All they seem to have thought about was, how to 
fill a large space or a small one in precisely the saine manner. The 
" monumental flatness," as I have heard it called, of their works was 
but the result of ignorance of the method of representing light and 
shade ; in which respect their works bear the same analogy to those 
of the Cinquecento artists, as the contemporary oil-paintings bear to 
what Vasari calls the " new manner." 

The Cinquecento practice of disregarding mullions,&c, arose from an 
artistic rebellion against the fetters of mediasvalisin. Glass-paintings 
did not cease to be glass-paintings until the " new manner " in oils 
was so imbibed by the glass-painters that they strove to over-finish 
and to imitate the effect of oil ; in which they necessarily failed. Sir 
Joshua Eeynolds's and West's works perpetuated the error in exe- 
cution — I mean technical execution ; grand and monumental as their 
designs are, they are not glass-paintings of so high an order as the 
productions of the Cinquecento, or even early sixteenth-century 

Gothic school 


C. Winston. 


My dear Wilson, Temple, 22nd Sept. 1861. 

After twenty-four hours' rumination, I have the more com- 
pletely settled down into an opinion that glass-painting has been 
more effectually raised from the mire, and set alongside of and on 
an equality with the sister arts, hy what has been done at Glasgow, 
than by anything else that I have yet seen in Europe. Plad Ain- 
miiller been allowed to go on in his own old way, colouring the 
glass with enamel colours, and laying the high lights down with 
enamel, you would have had works beautiful, no doubt, in so far as 
good drawing and excellent composition could have secured beauty, 
but which would have tended to an effect entirely at variance with 
the intention of the builders of the cathedral, since they would have 
converted the window-openings into, apparently, panels of solid 
wall, painted in fresco — an effect which is actually produced in 
the church of St. Germain l'Auxerrois at Paris, the windows of 



which have been executed by M. Marechal, of Metz, in the ordinary 
" German manner." But by your insisting upon the use of coloured 
(pot-metal) glass, as the colouring matter, and only allowing of 
enamel-paint as shadow, and, above all, by retaining clear high 
lio-hts, works have been obtained which are not likely ever to be 
mistaken for anything else than painted glass windows. And in 
this respect the men of Glasgow have read the world a lesson, for 
which they are entitled to the consideration and gratitude of every 
one learned enough to appreciate the additional beauty imparted 
to any sort of decoration by mere force of its having been exe- 
cuted in conformity with it's own peculiar mechanical and intrinsic 

I have been so accustomed, until now, to see all such modern 
glass-paintings as have the least title to be called works of art 
executed on a principle entirely opposed to a due display of the 
most beautiful of the essential properties of glass, namely, its trans- 
lucency, that perhaps I may have hardly done justice to the artistic 
drawing and composition of the Glasgow windows — considered as 
mere designs — in my admiration of them as glass-paintings. Yet I 
am sufficiently impressed with a sense of their artistic merits to enable 
me to express a conviction that, considering each one as a whole, 
that is, as an artistic glass-painting, and comparing it with one of 
the best ancient examples, the balance of excellence does remain 
with the modern German window. This conclusion was, I admit, 
wholly unexpected, and was, as it were, forced upon me by my ten 
hours' continuous and laborious scrutiny of the glass in the cathedral. 
And therefore, to prove to myself that I am not dreaming, I am 
writing down the steps which led to my conversion, a process 
which may perhaps not be without some practical use, if it should 
show in what respects I venhtre to think that even these windows 
are susceptible of improvement. 

As the glass-paintings which most resemble these in artistic merit 
and refinement are the Cinqnecento, and as the Lichfield glass is the 
finest Cinquecento example that I am acquainted with, and more- 
over is that with which T am most familiar, and of which my 
memory is the strongest, I having so recently studied it, I make my 
comparison between the Lichfield glass and the Glasgow. It must 
be admitted, of course, that, in point of tone and richness of colour, 
the Lichfield glass is superior, in a very high degree, to the 
Glasgow. This superiority is principally owing to the constitution 
of the ancient material ; and it will therefore continue to exist until 
the moderns have learned the art of making glass identical in its 
chemical constituents and mechanical formation with that of the 
middle of the sixteenth century. And this can be done only by 
continuing the chemical analyses initiated by my friends here, and 
working them out synthetically, as I recommended to Ainmuller. 


"Whether the use of glass identical with the old in texture would 
be compatible with that excessive delicacy of pictorial manipu- 
lation which is so charming in the Glasgow windows, is perhaps 
doubtful. I incline to think that it would be incompatible ; but 
of this I feel persuaded, that any loss in delicacy of execution would 
be more than compensated by an increase of power in general effect ; 
and therefore I do not hesitate to recommend the pressing upon 
Ainmuller the necessity of an improved material : the rather, because 
it is clear that nothing will conduce more to the popularity of 
artistical glass-painting than the introduction of tone and richness of 
colour. It is the effect of their colour which makes old windows so 
prized by the most learned and the most ignorant alike, and causes 
the latter to be easily blinded to the defects of modern glass-painting, 
provided that, by means of scumbling and other unlawful expedients, 
the glass is somewhat toned down from its original fierceness. I 
have no sort of doubt that, if the Glasgow windows were smeared 
over with brown paint and wax, to their ruin as works of art, they 
would gain in the estimation of ninety-nine out of every hundred 
spectators, from some of whom we might reasonably expect better 
judgment; but this shows how important an ingredient in glass- 
painting is colour of a fine rich subdued tone, and how foolish it 
is for great artists to neglect taking the only practical steps for 
obtaining it. But however one may regret, on looking at the Glas- 
gow windows, the absence of colour in a low key, such as one sees 
in the Lichfield glass, there is no denying that, regarded as har- 
monies of colours in a high key, these windows are unrivalled : and, 
whether it is owing to my sense of colour being more shrewdly 
tickled by a perfect harmony of colour in a high key than in a low 
one, — or whatever else the cause may be, — I confess I was more 
pleasurably affected by the harmonies of the lighter colours in some 
of these windows, than I ever remember myself to have been by 
those of the old ones. I allude particularly to the landscape back- 
grounds in Strahiiber's windows for Mr. Stirling of Keir, in the 
choir, and in his window in the nave, for Lord Home. This 
shows, therefore, that a high key of colour has its beauties, though 
they may refuse to exhibit themselves except upon the persuasion 
of those who are capable of feeling them keenly. It would be 
wrong, therefore, to say that these windows, like the generality of 
modern ones, are wholly inferior to the old ones in point of colour. 
Upon the whole they are, I think, inferior; but they are only 
inferior upon the balance ; they have, in the stronger colours, defects 
such as one deplores, and in the lighter colours excellences such 
as I have never seen in ancient glass. The defectiveness of the 
stronger colours could not, I think, be wholly removed without 
injury to the lighter colours ; because it would necessitate a change 
of key. And it may be a question how far it may be desirable to 

E 2 


effect an alteration of key, though my own feeling is certainly 
in favour of an alteration into a lower key, thinking that more 
would, on the whole, be gained than lost by the change. But this I 
can safely recommend, — the qualification of the stronger colours, 
such as green and red and blue, these in their order, without any 
change of key, by the simple expedient of diapering them, whether 
used in draperies or in plain grounds. 

But whatever opinion we may hold in respect of the inferiority of 
the new to the old glass in colour, there can be no doubt that, in 
every other respect, the superiority is entirely on the side of the new. 
Hess's prophets are immeasurably finer than anything that has yet 
been seen in old glass. There is nothing in old glass to surpass any 
of Strahiiber's compositions; and though some of the designs in 
the Lichfield glass may, in composition, be superior to those of the 
least successful of the designs at Glasgow, still, in execution, the 
Glasgow designs are superior. In all of the Lichfield glass there is 
a certain coarseness and carelessness of execution which would con- 
trast unfavourably with the care, and finish, and delicacy displayed 
in the Glasgow windows. The old style, though wonderfully 
effective, is a rough-and-ready style after all. They were dexterous 
manipulators, rather than accomplished artists. And I should not 
hesitate to say that in every instance the designs (many of which 
were evidently the work of very great artists) have suffered in the 
execution upon the glass. This I do not think can be generally said 
of the Glasgow glass. Here and there, no doubt, there is a timidity 
of execution ; but I am sure that, if the least successful were com- 
pared with the best of the Lichfield windows, it would be seen that 
correctness of drawing was entirely on the side of the moderns. 
Indeed, so convinced am I of the superiority of the German glass 
over the old, in technical excellence of every kind, and in compo- 
sition and drawing generally, and in effects of broken colour, that 
upon the whole I cannot withhold the palm from the former : it 
must be considered to be an improvement upon old glass. 

Of course, as an antiquary, I could easily pick holes in many 
things, especially in the heraldry. It was also impossible not to see, 
when one looked for it, that the general character of the draperies 
was that of the sixteenth century, whilst that of the ornament was 
of the fourteenth. But the anachronism was so disguised by the 
similarity of execution — the same amount of shadow and finish 
having been given to the ornament as to the figures — 1hat it ceased 
to be offensive, or even noticeable at first sight. 1 think a wise dis- 
cretion was exercised in selecting the general style of ornament 
from that of the fourteenth century ; but this has been sufficiently 
modified not to contrast with the figures, whilst it remains suf- 
ficiently like that of the early part of the fourteenth, or end of the 
thirteenth century, not to disagree with the architectxaral details of 


the building. If I was asked to say what I thought was the style of 
the painted glass, I should answer that it was in the style of the nine- 
teenth century, modified to suit the character of a building of the 
reign of Edward I., and this I believe to be the absolute truth. The 
windows sufficiently agree with the character of the building, 
without being so rigidly archaic as to exclude the improvements of 
modern art ; and I think that it would have been mere pedantry 
to have insisted on a more cordial agreement between the glass and 
the architecture. Indeed, a perfect conformity between the styles 
of the two would have been absolutely impossible, unless the donors 
of the windows would have agreed to forego their heraldry, — the 
clergy, their choice of subjects, — the people, writing such as they 
could read, — the artists, their art; — in fine, unless everything had 
been given up which makes these windows worth having. Another, 
and of itself a complete bar to perfect conformity between the glass 
and the architecture, would have been the ditference that exists 
between the material, as now made, and that used in the thirteenth 
or fourteenth centuries. This consideration may seem to some to be 
frivolous. All I know is, that to the true antiquary a consideration 
of the nature of the material is as inseparably connected with an 
investigation of the date of a painted window, as a consideration of 
its heraldry, its lettering, its art, can possibly be. Unless there is a 
perfect agreement in all these things, he must be a poor antiquary 
indeed who cannot pronounce the work, without hesitation, to be 
spurious. As, therefore, an exact conformity was, in the nature of 
things, impossible, a latitude such as that which has enabled the 
artists to make the windows such as they are — real works of fine 
art in painted glass — was most properly permitted. 

Believe me most truly yours, 

C. Winston. 


My dear Wilson, Bbyl, Flintshire, 16th Oct. 1861. 

You have indeed done good service 

I have written a letter of chemical details of fourteen pages to 
Ainmiiller, and have sent also a box of specimens to him, on the old 
principle of seeing is believing. But before entering on this matter 
I wrote as follows :— Allow me to express the very great pleasure 
received from examining last month the magnificent windows of 
Glasgow Cathedral, which have been executed by your establish- 
ment. I am well acquainted with most of the glass-paintings which 
have been, during several years past, executed under your direction 
for various places, including those at the Maria Hilf Church at Munich, 


at Cologne Cathedral, and at Peterhouse College, Cambridge. But 
the glass-paintings at Glasgow do, in my opinion, surpass them all, 
as works in painted glass. I say emphatically — as works in painted 
glass ; because the employment by your establishment of artists 
enjoying a European reputation, to make the cartoons, has always 
ensured to your works an artistic excellence, which favourably dis- 
tinguishes them from all other, modern and even ancient. But it is in 
respect of the great superiority as glass-painting over all others, that 
I particularly refer to the windows of Glasgow Cathedral. I ven- 
ture to attribute this superiority to your having executed them 
according to the method pursued in the ancient glass-paintings of 
the best period, that is between 1505 and 1550, in which no enamel 
colours are used except for outlines and shadow. By this means 
you have imparted to these works a peculiar brilliancy and delicacy 
which characterise them as glass-paintings, and effectually distin- 
guish them from paintings on opaque surfaces, such as paintings in 
oil and fresco. And I cannot but think that it is partly on account 
of the idea, which their pellucid appearance forces upon the mind, 
that they are glass-paintings, and nothing else, — partly on account 
of the manipulation of the paintings not having been too highly 
elaborated, — that it happens that the lead-work (verbleiung) and 
the iron bars or arming of these windows are found to be no dis- 
figurement to the pictures. On the contrary, the effect of the glass- 
painting is actually improved by these appendages ; which, — how- 
ever out of place and disagreeable they may seem in a glass-painting 
which resembles oil or fresco painting in the elaboration of its execu- 
tion, — are yet recognized as necessaiy and essential to what is shown 
undisguisedly to be nothing else than a glass-window. It is true 
that 1 have seen paintings upon glass, both from your establishment, 
and from Dresden, Brussels, Metz, and particularly Milan, that are 
more exquisitely finished, and (by means of enamels) more delicately 
and variously coloured, than these windows of Glasgow Cathedral; 
but I always observed that in proportion as in this respect they 
approached the effect of paintings upon canvas, in fresco, or on 
china, so did they lose brilliancy and pellucidness, and the less did 
their general character appear to harmonize with the harsh black 
lines of the lead-work and iron bars ; which, therefore, in a pro- 
portionate degree, struck me as being blemishes in the picture. 

This is why I prefer the Glasgow windows so greatly to any 
others of modern times : indeed, considered as glass-painting, they 
appear to me to touch perfection. I perceived in them all how 
deeply the ancient glass-paintings had been studied; how, whilst 
adopting the ancient method, you had improved upon it, as, for 
instance, by using a blue enamel to shade upon purple-coloured 
glass, a purple enamel to shade upon blue-coloured glass, instead 
of uniformly employing a brown enamel for the purpose of 
shading ; and I also observed in some of the windows effects 


of landscape such as I have certainly never seen equalled in any- 
ancient glass-painting. I allude particularly to the landscape in 
a window executed from a design by Strahuber for Mr. Stirling of 
Keir, in which the landscape was rosy and full of sunshine, and 
yet perfectly preserved its distance. A similar effect was also 
observable in another window from a design by the same artist for 
the Earl of Home. And I most highly admired the simple manner 
in which these beautiful effects were produced, as being so entirely 
in accordance with the principle of true glass-painting. 

It is unnecessaiy for me to say anything in praise of the pictures 
themselves — the excellent drawing and arrangement of the groups, 
the dignity of the single figures, the draperies so well suited in 
their manner for painted glass, &c. — for excellence of this kind was 
ensured by your having had recourse for the cartoons to such artists 
as Professor Von Hess, Strahuber, Von Schwinde, &c. ; but I cannot 
omit again to express my extreme satisfaction at everything con- 
nected with these windows which was the especial woik of your 
establishment, such as the harmony of the colouring and the breadth 
of the effect ; and it gives me great pleasure to be able to say that 
the window which seemed to be most agreeable in respect of orna- 
mentation was the one which was executed from your own designs 
for Mr. Walter Stirling. I have no hesitation in declaring that, in 
my humble opinion, when we consider the high art displayed in 
the figures, and the skill shown in the execution of these windows 
as glass-paintings, the windows of Glasgow Cathedral are absolutely 
unrivalled. No modern work approaches them, and upon the whole 
they are certainly superior to any ancient work. 

There is one thing, however, that I notice in these windows 
which now brings me to the consideration of your letter of the 
18th August. 

Each of your windows is as perfect a harmony of colour as the 
finest old window can be pronounced to be; but the difference is 
that in your windows the harmony is in a high key of colour, whilst 
in the old windows the harmony is in a low key of colour. Now, a 
harmony in a low key of colour is undoubtedly more agreeable than 
a harmony in a high key, and so thought that prince of colourists 
Titian ; for it is remarkable that all his blues, greens, yellows, reds, 
and indeed all other hues, are low in tone, and are by no means 
pure colours. You should, therefore, endeavour to prevail upon your 
glass-maker to furnish your establishment with glass of a lower tone 
of colour than that which has been used in the Glasgow windows, 
especially with green glass, blue glass, and red glass of a lower 
tone ; these being the three colours, and particularly the two first 
named, which most struck me as being too high in key in the 

Glasgow windows 

[The remainder of this letter is wanting.] 



My DEAR "WlLSON, Temple, 5th April, 1862. 

I am delighted to think that you are able to attack the clear- 
story, the windows of which I specially remember, for it is the most 
elegant row of clearstory windows that I know of. 

When you speak of a dark effect there, you have Bourges in your 
mind. But I question whether, considering the difference between 
the lower glass and that at Bourges, you would not get a more 
striking effect by making the general fond of these windows a 
white pattern very like that of the west window. Of these patterns 
there is a great abundance in Germany. Cologne Cathedral, for 
instance, is full of them, so are Strasburg, Freyburg, &c. ; and it is 
time that the practice of the fourteenth century was, I think I may 
say universally, in favour of white patterns, with, or without, the 
insertion of figures and canopies, heraldry, &c, for clearstory win- 
dows. Even in the thirteenth century, the leaning was in favour 
of white patterns ; but this may have been from economical prin- 
ciples in both centuries. Certainly the work was more scamped in 
the fourteenth century than the thirteenth. Bourges, Canterbury, 
and Tours, so far as it goes, have all dark clearstories ; but the 
later cathedrals of the thirteenth century have white patterns in 
their clearstories — Salisbury for instance, Lincoln, and all the 
transitional ones, as well as those in the " Decorated " style. Exeter 
Cathedral is a good specimen of the partly ornamental, partly pic- 
torial treatment. So is Gloucester. You might if you liked have a 
single figure, without a canopy, on an ornamental quarry-ground, in 
each light. A row of splotches of colour along the bottoms of the 
windows, with grisaille above, w r ould tell wonderfully, and quite 
carry the idea, suggested by the west window, upwards. 

Most truly yours, 

C. "Winston. 


My DEAR WlLSON, Temple, 23rd June, 1862. 

I cannot but think that the green you mention is an arrow 
from my quiver. For I most particularly called their attention to 
the matter in my letters, and moreover sent them some fine old 
specimens for imitation. A good olive can be made from sulphate 
of iron ; but I forget whether I mentioned this. It all shows, how- 
ever, that these Germans are doing their best, and that they are not 
above taking a friendly hint. 

You are perfectly right in lettiug people know who are the designers 


of these windows. For if they had been designed by English artists 
of equal or corresponding reputation, their very names would have 
carried all before thern. 

There was an excellent article in the ' Times ' the other day, on 
the French artists, and their works, not without bearing on the sub- 
ject of glass-painting. The writer showed that the French artists 
had more regard to fame, and less to pelf, than ours. So, no doubt, 
have the Germans. Hence they will condescend to make designs 
for painted glass, at moderate rates ; whereas ours will not, unless 
they are paid at the same rate as if they were employed for a corre- 
sponding time on paintings for Mr. Smith's or Mr. Robinson's back- 
parlour. This, therefore, gives inferior men a monopoly of the 
opportunities for lasting fame, and nobody ought, under these cir- 
cumstances, to complain if those who are displeased with the per- 
formances of these inferior men betake themselves to the more 
liberal and congenial men of art in Germany 

Yours most truly, 

C. Winston. 


My dear Wilson, Temple, 18th Jan. 1863. 

I saw yesterday at Hughes's five of the lights intended for 
Glasgow ; four for the chapter-house and one for the crypt. I shall 
be curious to know your opinion of them when they are up in their 

My impression is that they will be valuable, as enabling a fair 
comparison to be made between our modern glass and the German. 
For they are the best that Hughes has yet done, and they are, I 
think, superior to anything we saw in the late Exhibition, of 
English performance. 

In these lights you have the best of the modern material ; and 
the depth of shade is as great as you would find at St. Gudule's. 
Moreover the backgrounds, though they do not quite stick to the 
figures, are yet flat enough to suit the most bigoted rnediaevalist. 
The detail of the canopy-work is moreover unexceptionable ; so 
that you have the mediaeval idea " carried out " as the fashion is. 

But does the thing accord better with the character of the ancient 
architecture than the German windows ? This is the problem, which 
I cannot but think these windows will solve. Speaking strictly as 
an antiquary, I feel sure that I should say that they harmonized 
with the ancient architecture not one bit more than what you have 
already ; because I see in every direction a something which is not 
at all like the old glass. The colours are all higher key, and there 


is a freedom in the drawing which would not be fouud in any ancient 

Then, as matter of taste, what some people might consider 
" deep and rich colouring" (and if these do nut exhibit this, what 
else would you have r) I consider heavy rather than deep, and 
violent rather than rich ; and the execution generally I should say 
was heavy rather than powerful. Still they are the best of the sort 
that I have yet seen. 

Now the most powerful Cinquecento windows, like those at 
Brussels, are not heavy. They have not the etberial effect that the 
German windows at Glasgow have ; but they are as unlike those of 
Hughes's, as they are to A r an Linge's. But I should be glad to hear 
your impression, after you have compared them in general effect 

with the German. is diligently working at the effect of his 

windows, and I think successfully. The designs are growing more 
and more like those in St. Gudule's, both in power and vivacity. 
There is nothing heavy about these, chiefly on account of the light 
backgrounds and the white in the architecture. 

Yours most trulv, 

C. Winston. 


My DEAR WlLSON, Rhyl, Flintshire, 26th Oct. LS63 

My paper on the Gloucester window is printed ; I expect a 
copy in a few days, which 1 will forward to you, begging your 
acceptance of it. 

The paper will really appear in the two next numbers of the 
4 Archaeological Journal.' But, if it anyway tends to strengthen 
your hands, you can use it as you like. The subject is treated 
entirely from the archaeological point of view. In that view it is of 
importance, fixing the date of that window, for it is like an anchor 
in the sea of speculation. 

Since then 1 have been engaged in an attempt to fix the date of 
the glass in Xettlestead Church, in Kent, a church famous rather 
for the remains of the heraldry in the windows, than for figures or 
works of art. Still this example will come well in with that of 
Gloucester. As the paper will be shorter than the Gloucester one, 
I shall endeavour to make it the peg to hang some practical remarks 
on ; and if I find the length will allow of this being done, I will 
send you the MS. before it is printed ; for I do not feel steady except 
in a matter purely archaeological. 

This glass at Kettlestead is of two dates; the earlier being of 
the commencement of the reign of Henry VI., and the later of the 


end of that reign. I hope, before I have done, to come to a date 
more trustworthy than that afforded by analogy, which at present is 
all that I can rely on. But it is curious to observe the wonderful 
difference between the glass material used in the Gloucester and 
the Nettlestead windows, and the difference between the drawing, 
shading, and general design of the two glass-paintings. The exe- 
cution generally is more tender and refined in the Nettlestead than 
in the Gloucester window, and the material used is more carefully 
made, and more even in tint, than that at Gloucester. 

This concurrent variation of the material and mode of execution 
I have several times called attention to in the papers I have 
written ; and you have made me see its importance more than I 
had ever before seen it, by your remarks on the new manufacture in 
relation to the Munich execution. 

[The remainder of this letter is wanting. The intended memoir 
on the Nettlestead glass was not written.] 


My dear Wilson, Temple, 7th Dec. 1863. 

Your note about the clearstory has only just (1*30 p.m.) come 
to hand, as you had inadvertently directed to No. 4, instead of No. 3, 
Harcourt Buildings. 

I am altogether of the same opinion as yourself with regard to 
the necessity of the enlargement of the figures in the clearstory. 
This rule obtains, with the best effect, in the clearstories at 
Bourges and Canterbury, and in the later clearstory at Exeter. 
As a rule also, the clearstory figures should be slenderer in pro- 
portion than those in the lower windows ; and you would do well 
to divide the panel beneath the figure into three parts, for the 
oval form which you have given will be still further elongated by 

Diapers in glass draperies should, I think, be used whenever they 
can be used. The mistake the moderns make is the following an 
abominable mediaeval practice of sticking pieces of other colours 
into a drapery, for instance, of blue or red. This distracts the eye, 
whereas diaper gives a sparkling richness without detracting at all 
from the breadth of the colouring ; and the bigger the figures the 
greater necessity is there for diapers. 

I also quite agree with you on the propriety of making these 
figures and their accessories as little pictorial and as ornamental 
as possible ; and in doing them, as you and Ainmuller will agree to 
do them, you will read a good lesson to the advocates of the " ironed- 
out fiat style." It will be quite worth while going again to Scot- 


land, if you succeed, as I have no doubt you will, in making a series 
of ornamental figures and accessories after an artistic fashion. It 

was this that wished to see in the lower windows ; but I am 

quite sure that he had not clear ideas on the subject well elaborated 
and brought out. 

In the clearstory at Augsburg Cathedral, the figures are richly 
coloured on a white ground, diapered ; but, then, this ground has 
that solid appearance which the glass of the twelfth century (of 
which this is) always has, owing to the presence of alumina in the 
glass. But you might diaper your white, after a solemn fashion, 
into a deep diaper, as at Exeter, at Canterbury, and Bourges, as you 
know the whole thing is richly coloured, with the exception of the 
canopies, which are wholly white and yellow. Ainmiiller's general 
colouring is to my mind so good, and he is so alive to the value of 
white as a fuil to the coloured glass, that, I fancy, you may with 
safety let him go his own gait. 

The more I think of it, the more I am sure that glass- 
painting is in its infancy, even when we go to the best professors 

Yours most truly, 

C. Winston. 


My dear Wilson, • Temple, lotb Jan. 1864. 

It will do me a great deal of good to read what you write, so 
pray send it. 

In consequence of some very true remarks which you made after 
I had written that paper on the Glasgow windows, which appeared 
in the ' Illustrated News,' I have reconsidered the matter a good 
deal, and the result of my cogitations 1 have committed to paper, 
with the intent, after first submitting them to you, to append them 
to the account I am engaged to write on the Kettlestead glass for the 
Kent Archaeological Society. And the conclusion that (as at present 
advised) I have come to is, that the whole of our misfortunes in 
respect of modern glass-painting arise from a want of appreciating the 
fact that, in these days, any sort of art to be successful must be Euro- 
pean. It will not do for us to disregard the comity of nations which 
(as the Emperor Napoleon remarks) makes Europe but one country, 
and set up for ourselves a standard of art reprobated by foreigners. 
This is the chief objection to our mediaeval mania. In defiance of 
modern improvements in building, — or rather in opposition to them, 
as too suggestive of the enlightenment of the age, — we build churches 
on the mediaeval model, yielding however, in this, to nineteenth- 


century influence by the addition of small details and refinements, 
which have rendered the style essentially " Jemmy-Gothic." 

The young architects may find this style, which has no rules, 
a very convenient one as a cover to ignorance of proportion and 
arrangement, and as saving a great deal of consideration and thought. 
The result is shown in such a combination of crude extravagance as 
we see in a new building in the Strand, which must bring down 
upon us the contempt of every foreigner 

In designing windows for mediaeval churches there are but two 
courses which experience shows are available — either to adopt modern 
ai*t (and this is the wise course -when figures are required), or else to 
adopt medieval art ; and I am persuaded that this is only good advice 
when the donors of the windows will be content with pattern- 

There is no third course, as I once supposed and advocated in 
the article in the ' Illustrated News,' of getting a modification of 
medievalism by good artists. You entirely convinced me of my 
error. The Glasgow windows, and also the Alnwick window (by 
Dyce), are sufficient proofs that I was wrong and you were 

Therefore, Wilson, our course must be to inculcate upon the 
donors of windows,— that, 1st. "Windows ought not to be caricatures 
and offensive objects. 

2nd. That when figures or groups are employed, this can be 
avoided only by employing good artists, and that it will necessitate 
the employment of a style which is not mediaeval. 

3rd. That when figures or groups are not insisted on, the windows 
may be made as much in " harmony " with the style of the building 
as is compatible with our altered manufacture of glass ; and that 
there are quantities of patterns that are excellent, and only require 
an intelligent copyist to make them most agreeable ; and that, if 
the ancient patterns are really and deeply studied, it will be found 
that an inexhaustible store of new patterns may be devised, entirely 
agreeing with them in spirit and character, and yet requiring no 
greater skill than any successful student at a School of Design 
might reasonably be expected to possess ; though he would be the 
last person to whom any reasonable being would intrust the design- 
ing of a picture. 

These are the last new lights that I have acquired in this most 
interesting subject, and I shall (if you approve of them) " stick " to 
them, as you say I have done (in your last most kind and welcome 
letter, just come to hand, for which many thanks), through good 
report or evil report. 

In my now opinion, I think that the Glasgow windows would have 
been more successful if Ainmiiller had been told to make all the 
canopy-work like the German Gothic of the sixteenth century,— 



A pp. 

such as we see in Peter Fischer's shrine at Nuremberg, and in the 
" stick and leaf" canopy- work in the cathedral at Munich. 

This ornamentation, being broad, and its style little pronounced, 
would have been in entire harmony with the figures. It is true 
that our Gothicists would have complained, but to all other men 
their objections would have in the end appeared untenable. 

Most truly 3-ours, 

C. Winston. 





''Read for the writer by the Rev. J. L. Petit, on the 13th of September, 1845, at 
the Meeting of the Archaeological Institute at Winchester ; and then accom- 
panied with fifteen drawings of Painted Glass.) 

Figures of the Carpenter, the Mason, and the Clerk of the Works from the East Window 
of the College Chapel. 

T is perhaps hardly necessary to observe that an 
original glass-painting, whatever may be its age, 
possesses features characteristic of the period at 
which it was executed ; and this, whether the 
work formed a complete design of itself, or was 
merely a repair, or an addition. But inasmuch 
as it would be impossible, without the aid of 
numerous finished drawings, and without vastly 
exceeding the limits of such a paper as this, to point out, except 


in very vague and general terms, the marks by which the date of a 
glass-painting may be ascertained with tolerable exactness, I shall 
not enter into the subject at present, but confine myself to a short 
notice of the glass in the Cathedral, College, St. John's Church, 
St. Cross, &c. I ought, however, to state that the peculiarities 
in the design and execution of glass-paintings are as capable of 
convenient classification as are architectural peculiarities ; and 
that I shall refer to the three great medieval styles of glass- 
painting by the terms Early English, Decorated, and Perpen- 
dicular, each style being nearly contemporaneous with the 
synonymous style of architecture, as defined by Rickman, to 
whose phraseology I think it advisable to adhere as much as 
possible. The term Cinquecento I shall apply to any glass, prior 
to the year 1550, which exhibits in its details the peculiar style 
of ornament known by this name. 

The earliest specimens of Early English glass that I have 
met with in this neighbourhood are two fragments, probably of 
a border, worked in with other glass, in the west window of the 
nave of St. Cross ; and two other fragments, likewise of a border, 
over the door leading into the refectory. All this glass is pre- 
cisely of the same character, and I think early in the thirteenth 
century. It doubtless came out of one of the Norman windows 
of the church, and is all that I have been able to discover of the 
original glazing. 

A few small fragments of later Early English are at present 
contained in two boxes in the cloisters of Winchester College, 
which are filled with scraps, principally of glass of Wykeham's 
time, brought from New College Chapel, Oxford. A few similar 
fragments may be seen amongst other glass at St. Cross. This 
glass is of the last half of the thirteenth century, and is similar 
to that in Salisbury Cathedral. 

Two circles of early Decorated glass are over the door of the 
refectory of St. Cross, and two or three more in the west window 
of Winchester Cathedral. They are composed of mere plain 
pieces of coloured glass disposed in a geometrical pattern, and 
prove how much of the effect of early glass is owing to the 
texture of the material. There are fragments of early Decorated 
borders scattered about the windows of St. Cross. There is also 
a piece of early Decorated ornament in one of the before-men- 
tioned boxes ; and in the east window of the north aisle of 
Rornsey church, Hants, is an early Decorated panel, containing 
a representation of Christ bearing the Cross. All this is, I think, 
of the beginning of the fourteenth century. 


There are also specimens of later Decorated glass at St. Cross ; 
in the boxes in the college, and in a tracery light of the north 
window of De Lacy's work in the cathedral. 

This neighbourhood is much richer in the early Perpendicular 
than in any other glass. 

The earliest specimen consists of the heads of two canopies in 
the east window of the chancel of St. John's Church, Winchester, 
in which it is hard to say whether the Decorated or the Perpen- 
dicular features predominate. 

The next in date is afforded by the remains of the original 
glass in the west window of Winchester Cathedral, the west 
windows of the aisles, and the first window in the south aisle, 
counting from the west. No painted glass remains in the first 
and second windows from the west in the north aisle. This 
glass chiefly consists of the heads of canopies; in the west 
window, however, two or three of the original figures remain. 
It is undoubtedly the earliest Perpendicular glass in the cathe- 
dral, and may be the work of Wykeham's predecessor, Bishop 

In Wykeham's will, dated rather more than a year before his 
death, 1 he bequeaths a sum of money for the glazing of the 
windows of the cathedral, beginning from the west end, at the 
first windoiv of the new work done by him ; from which it would 
appear that some windows at the western end of the edifice had 
been already glazed. The character of the glass in the above- 
mentioned windows, which I presume were glazed by Bishop 
Edington, is, however, nearly identical with that in the east 
windows of the ante-chapel of NeAV College, Oxford, and with 
most of that in the before-mentioned boxes, which I am informed 
was taken from the west window of New College Chapel, 
Oxford, at the time the window designed by Sir Joshua 
Reynolds was put up. 

The next in date in Winchester Cathedral is the glass in 
the other windows of the aisles of the nave, and in the clear- 
story windows of the nave. This is a little later than the glass 
in the west window, and is of precisely the same character 
as the original glass now remaining in the north, south, and 
west windows of the ante-chapel of New College Chapel, Oxford. 
According to Wykeham's will, these windows of the cathedral 
were to be glazed in the following order. Those of the south 
aisle and clearstory first, beginning from the west ; then those 

J Wykeham died Sept :i4, 14o4. 


of the north aisle and clearstory, also beginning from the west, 
provided the money would go so far. 1 Much more glass remains 
on the north than on the south side of the cathedral ; but from 
the existing fragments I cannot discover any perceptible differ- 
ence between the glass on either side, whether in the drawing 
or in the texture of the material. 

Four figures, and parts of their canopies, belonging to this 
glass, appear to have been removed into the first window from 
the east of the clearstory of the choir. The head of the western- 
most figure, a female, is as fine as anything that I have yet seen 
in glass of this or any other period. 

In the west window of the nave of St. Cross are many quarries 
of this date, and the original part of the figures in the lower 
part of the window is coeval with the quarries. The cross in 
this window, which is embedded in the quarries, is modern, and 
is made of sheet-copper. 

The College Chapel was, it seems, originally glazed with glass 
of the same date as that I have just been speaking of. 

All the present glass in its side windows is, however, modern, 
as well as all that in its east window, with the trifling exception 
of some little bits in the tracery lights of the east window, con- 
sisting of two small figures, the head of an angel, and four other 
small fragments. 

The original designs have been preserved in the modern glass 
with considerable fidelity ; indeed, considering the time when it 
was executed, about twenty years ago, it must be admitted to be 
a very good copy of the old. The art of making coloured glass 
was not so well understood then as now : in particular the 
manufacture of liuby glass, like that of the fifteenth and six- 
teenth centuries, was revived by the French only a few years 
ago, and consequently long after these windows were painted. 
The artist, therefore, worked under peculiar disadvantages ; 
nevertheless, had the old glass of the chapel been copied this 
very year, however exactly, and with whatever care in the selec- 
tion of the colours, the chapel windows would have been only 
one degree better in appearance than they now are. They 
would merely have exhibited the colouring of the sixteenth 
century, instead of, as they now do, that of the nineteenth, united 
with the drawing of the early part of the fifteenth century. For 
the texture of all modern manufactured glass, uncoloured as well 
as coloured, is identical only with that of the sixteenth century, 

Lowth's ' Life of Wykebam,' p. 387, 


and is totally different from the texture of earlier glass. I can- 
not too pointedly call attention to this fact, nor too earnestly 
express my decided opinion that, with the present materials, the 
only glass which we can successfully imitate, and consequently 
the only styles in which modern glass should under these 
circumstances be painted, are those of the sixteenth century. In 
all old glass the nature of the material varies as completely as the 
character of the drawing and execution : indeed, the texture of 
the glass affords of itself a criterion of its date. This principle 
of adapting the execution to the material pervades all ancient, 
and indeed all other manufactured work of original design ; and 
it is in vain to imitate the drawing without also imitating the 
material in which the work is to be executed. Hence it is that 
modern encaustic tiles, whatever may be the date of the pattern 
impressed upon them, always appear to be of the same date, viz. 
that of the manufacture of the tile : and hence it also is, that 
the best modern Early English and Decorated windows must 
always fail to please a practised eye, not only on account of 
their violation of the rules of style, but, what is a far greater 
objection in a work of art, on account of the. total want of 
harmony between the material and the mode, in which it is 

To return, however, from this digression. The windows 
in the chapel are still of great value, as giving the arrange- 
ment, and to a considerable extent the drawing, of the original 

The next glass in order of date is in the heads of the three 
westernmost windows, on the north side of the clearstory of the 
choir in Winchester Cathedral : it consists of canopy-work and 
cherubim. The four figures in the upper tier of lower lights in 
the easternmost of these three windows are of the same time, 
and appear to be in their original position. The eight figures 
and canopies in the upper tier of the two easternmost windows 
on the south side of this clearstory are likewise of the same 
date ; but these are all too short by six or ten inches for the 
spaces they occupy, which would cause a suspicion of their 
having been removed from some other windows. All this glass 
is, I think, of the close of Henry VI. 's reign. 

There are fragments of glass of the same date as that last 
noticed, scattered about the windows of St. John's Church, 

The glass remaining in the east window of the north transept 
of St. Cross is a little later. A better specimen of the border 

f 2 


which ornaments the glass in this window may he seen iu 
the east window of the chancel of St. Peter's Church, Cheesehill, 

The glass of the east window of the College Library is of the 
time of Edward IV., or early part of the reign of Henry VII., 
and was removed some years ago to its present position from 
the small chapel on the south side of the College Chapel, in 
which the font now is. The glass is too narrow for the spaces 
it occupies. 

The arms in the windows of the Refectory at St. Cross, con- 
sisting of those of Cardinal Beaufort, and a shield bearing the 
livery colours of his family, are of the latter half of the fifteenth 
century. The cardinal's arms are surmounted with his hat, and 
surrounded with its pendent strings. The whole is on a quarry 
ground, on which is repeated a motto, which I presume to be 
the cardinal's. The words are " A Hono & Lyesse," written on 
small scrolls. 1 

The glass in the east window of the Choir of Winchester 
Cathedral is perhaps a little earlier than 1525, and is the work 
of Bishop Fox, whose arms, and motto, " Est deo gracia," are 
introduced into it. 

This window must, when perfect, have been a truly magni- 
ficent one : it would be unfair to judge of it in its present state. 
The only part of the glass now in its original position consists 
(as I think) of the two figures which occupy the two southern- 
most of the lower lights, and of that in all the tracery lights, 
except the top central one and the three immediately below it. 
The top central light is filled principally with some glass of 
Wykeham's time, and all the rest of the window with glass 
of Fox's time, removed from other windows. 

Tins window, when compared with the surrounding ones, 
exhibits most strikingly the characteristic features of the time. 
It is superior to the other glass-paintings in the fulness and 
arrangement of its colours, but it is less brilliant, owing to the 
greater depth of the shading, to which the increased roundness 
of the figures is owing. In point of execution, I apprehend that 
it is as nearly perfect as painted glass can be. In it the shadows 
have attained their proper limit. Deeper shadows would have 
produced blackness and opacity, and lighter shadows a greater 
degree of flatness than is necessarily inherent in a real glass- 
painting. This is the style which in my opinion ought to be 

1 A representation of these arm? is given in the plnte opposite. 


From the Refectory, St. Cross 

To face page 6S. 


adopted at the present day, using the Cinquecento ornaments 
when the glass is destined for a Roman or Palladian building, 
and Gothic details when the glass is, as here, designed for 
a Gothic edifice. It was at this period that glass-painting 
attained its highest perfection as an art. This circumstance 
alone would be a sufficient reason, one would think, for adopting 
the style of the first half of the sixteenth century in modern 
works, in preference to the earlier and less perfect styles ; but 
I have already pointed out a fatal objection to the adoption of 
earlier styles — the impossibility of obtaining glass of the requisite 
texture in which to execute ivorks designed in any of the earlier 

Bishop Fox's glass seems originally to have extended into 
some of the side windows of the clearstory of the choir, the 
heads of some of his canopies still retaining their original posi- 
tions in these windows. The easternmost' window on the north 
side of this clearstory was evidently at one time filled with his 
glass. The tracery lights still remain, and it is curious to 
observe how their design and arrangement of colour are accom- 
modated to the design and arrangement of colour of the earlier 
glass in the other windows of this clearstory, and which I have 
before said I believe to be of the latter part of the reign of 
Henry YI. 

The aisle windows, both on the north and south sides of the 
choir, also contain remains of Bishop Fox's glass. When perfect, 
the glass in this part of the cathedral might have stood a com- 
parison with the finest continental examples. 

There is also some late glass, but much mutilated, in the east 
window of the Lady-chapel of the cathedral ; and in one of the 
east windows of the south transept are a few fragments of Cinque- 
cento glass. 

In the Library at the Deanery are some excellent specimens 
of heraldic glass, of the time of James I. and Charles L, in 
which, however, the decline of the art of glass-painting is very 

There are other detached portions of glass scattered about 
Winchester, but I have described I believe the greater part, in 
order to enable others to make out a series of glass of different 
dates, to examine it, and judge for themselves, assuring them 
that a careful investigation of existing specimens will alone 
enable them to acquire a critical knowledge of painted glass. 
And as every little fragment of painted glass has its value in 
the eyes of the student, however insignificant it may be in itself, 


I will again urge those who have painted glass in their posses- 
sion carefully to preserve it. Time is perpetually destroying the 
evidences of art, and his chief assistants are the negligence 
and indifference of those who chance to possess specimens, 
valuable only for the purpose of comparison with more perfect 

I cannot conclude without expressing my gratitude to the 
Dean and Chapter of Winchester for their kindness in per- 
mitting me free access to every part of the Cathedral ; and also 
to the Warden of Winchester College, for allowing me to 
examine the glass in the boxes in the cloister, and to copy such 
parts of it as I thought proper. 

Figure of the Glass-painter from the East Window of the College Chapel. 



(From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at 
York, July, 1846.) 

OT many cities can boast of more extensive and 
important remains of painted glass than York. 
The examples extend over a period of nearly four 
centuries, but it is the almost unbroken series of 
glass-paintings of the fourteenth and fifteenth 
centuries which renders this collection so interest- 
ing to the student. 

The greater portion of these specimens is in 
the Minster, and their value as evidences of the state of the 
art at different periods has been enhanced by Mr. Browne's 
laborious investigation of a vast mass of original documents 
relating to the building and adorning of the cathedral, which 
has enabled him to assign dates to most of the windows with 
considerable precision. 

It is not my intention to enter into any detailed statement 
concerning these windows, but simply to point out, as nearly as 
I can, the order in which they should be examined ; leaving it 
to the student to ascertain the difference of style observable in 
these works, and referring him for particular dates to Browne's 
* History of York Cathedral.' Mr. Browne's excellent notes on 
the painted glass in the Parish Churches, which are in the 
hands of the members of the Institute, render it unnecessary for 
me to offer many observations on this subject. 

The earliest painted glass in this city, and indeed one of the 
earliest specimens that I am acquainted with in England, is 
a portion of a Jesse in the second window from the west, on the 
north side of the clearstory of the nave, of the cathedral. It 
forms the upper subject in the westernmost lower light of this 
window. The date of the glass is about 1200 ; it is therefore 
much older than the greater part of the Early English glass at 


Canterbury Cathedral, to wliich I do not think a date can be 
assigned much earlier than the middle of the thirteenth century. 
A coloured engraving of this very curious example is given in 
Browne's 'History of York Cathedral,' plate 123. Much Early 
English glass, varying in date from the beginning to the middle 
of the thirteenth century, has been employed to fill the wheel of 
tracery in the head of the last-mentioned window, as well as the 
wheels in the tracery of the five next clearstory windows. The 
upper tier of subjects in the lower lights of the fifth and seventh 
windows, counting from the west, on the north side of this clear- 
story, are also Early English. An Early English subject is 
inserted in one of the lower lights of the sixth clearstory window, 
counting from the west. The wheels in the tracery of all but 
three of the clearstory windows, on the south side of the nave, 
are likewise filled with Early English glass ; and Early English 
glass-paintings are also to be found amongst the subjects in 
their lower lights. Coloured engravings of some of this glass 
are given in Browne's ' History of York Cathedral ; ' one 
plate — of great value to the antiquary — represents a series of 
borders, from the commencement to the middle of the thir- 
teenth century. 

The next glass in order of date is that in the Five Sisters : 
which beautiful pattern-windows are of the latter half of the 
thirteenth century. It is hardly necessary to observe that the 
glazing of the five lancets above the Sisters is modern. A por- 
tion of the pattern of each of the Five Sisters has been carefully 
engraved in Browne's 'York,' plates 61, 63, 65, 67, and 69. 
Some glass of the same character and date as that in the Five 
Sisters has been inserted in the tracery of the second window, 
from the door, in the vestibule or passage leading into the 
chapter-house. The remains of a very nice Early English win- 
dow of the latter half of the thirteenth century are inserted in 
two Decorated windows on the north side of St. Dennis or 
Dionis Church, YValmgate, in this city. 

The next glass in order of date is that in the chapter-house 
and vestibule leading into it. This is of the time of Edward II., 
and commencement of the reign of Edward III., and is an 
extremely beautiful specimen of early Decorated work. Accurate 
engravings of the patterns of some of these windows are given 
in Browne's ' York,' plates 79, 83, 85, 88, and 92 ; and a coloured 
print of one of the subjects, the Annunciation, has lately been 
published in this city. One window in the chapter-house, that 
opposite the entrance, is a restoration by Messrs. Bamett and 


Sons, of York ; it has been carefully executed, and if it does not 
produce so satisfactory an effect as the original windows, this 
arises not from the fault of the artist, bat from the impossibility 
of procuring, at the present day, a material similar in texture to 
the glass of the fourteenth century. 

The next glass in order of date is that in the nave of the 
cathedral, its clearstory, and aisles. This glass is all of the time 
of Edward III. The contract for glazing the great west window 
is dated 1330, and none of the glass probably is later than 1350. 
The general arrangement and execution of the designs through- 
out this part of the building are well worthy of notice, as evincing 
the attention paid by our ancestors to general effects in these 
matters. The west windows of the nave and aisles, of which 
distant views may be obtained, have their lower lights filled 
with large figures and canopies ; while the windows of the aisles, 
with but one exception, are adorned with paintings of a more 
complicated character, and on a smaller scale, and which are 
therefore better calculated for a near inspection. Much of the 
plain geometrical glazing in the clearstory windows is original, 
and, like that in a similar position in Cologne Cathedral, affords 
a proof that the ancient glass-painters did not consider them- 
selves bound to finish patterns destined to occupy a distant 
position as highly as those placed nearer the eye. Some 
Decorated glass of the same character and date as that in the 
nave has been placed in the first window from the west of 
the south aisle of the choir. The second and third clearstory 
windows from the east, on the south side of the choir, contain 
similar glass, which, as I conjecture, has been removed thither 
from one or other of the two blank side windows of the north 
and south aisles of the nave. Many of the churches in the town 
possess good Decorated glass in their windows ; I may mention 
in particular the east window of the north aisle of All Saints', 
North-street, and the westernmost window of the north aisle 
of St. Martin's-cum-Gregory : there are also the remains of a 
Decorated Jesse, like that in one of the windows of the south 
aisle of the nave of the Cathedral, in St. Dennis or Dionis 
Church; and some very perfect Decorated designs in the first 
and second windows from the east on the north side of that 

The earliest Perpendicular glass in the Cathedral is contained 
in the third window from the east in the south aisle of the 
choir, in the third and fourth windows from the east in 
the north clearstory of the choir, and in the fourth clearstory 


window from the east on the opposite side of the choir. These 
windows are of the close of the fourteenth century. There is 
also an early Perpendicular Jesse in the third window from the 
west in the south aisle of the choir. The date of the east win- 
dow of the choir is well known ; a contract for glazing it in 
three years was made in 1404. This window is one of the best 
executed that I have ever seen ; the beauty of the figures, how- 
ever, cannot be fully appreciated without inspecting them closely 
from the gallery near the window. The other windows of the 
choir aisles, eastward of the small eastern transepts, as well as 
the glass in the lancet windows on the east side of the great 
western transepts, appear to be likewise of the time of Henry 
IV. Some of these windows may probably be a few years earlier 
than the east window. All the rest of the glass in the choir is 
of the reigns of Henry V. and Henry VI. ; the greater portion 
belonging to the latter reign. The chief peculiarity that I have 
observed in these windows is, that the white glass, which enters 
so largely into their composition, is, generally speaking, less 
green in tint than is usual, especially in the western and 
southern parts of England. Mr. Browne has informed me that 
it clearly appears, from the fabric rolls, that this white glass is of 
English manufacture, which circumstance may perhaps serve to 
account for its whiteness. There is some very good glass of the 
time of Henry VI. in the east and other windows of All Saints' 
Church, North-street; the east window unfortunately has not 
been improved by the modern restorations, which appear to have 
been made in ignorance of the fundamental principles of the 
Perpendicular style of glass-painting. St. Martin's Church, 
Coney-street, contains much painted glass of the time of 
Henry VI., of good character, and valuable as affording an 
example of a general arrangement of designs throughout an 
entire building. 

Some glass of the reign of Henry VII. has been inserted in 
the four upper south windows of the great west transept of 
the Cathedral : the heads of some, if not all of the figures, are 

A very beautiful glass-painting, of the last half of the sixteenth 
century, has been inserted in the window next the east, of the 
south aisle of the choir. It was presented to the Cathedral by 
Lord Carlisle in 1804, and was brought from a church at Rouen. 
The design is evidently taken from a painting, I believe by 
Baroccio (who died in 1612, aged 84), but the colouring and 
execution have been varied to suit the nature of the material 


employed. I infer from the column-like arrangement of the 
groups, as well as the actual division-lines of the glass, that this 
work was originally painted for a four-light window. This is 
neither the place nor the occasion for any discussion touching 
the relative merits of this and the earlier glass-paintings in the 
Cathedral ; but I may be permitted to observe that this work 
affords a proof that it is not impossible to unite the drawing and 
colouring of an advanced period of art to the true practice of 
glass-painting. In the windows by Peckitt at the south end 
of the great west transept, the principles of painting upon glass 
and painting upon canvas are confounded together; in attempt- 
ing to imitate the depth of an oil-painting by shadows alone, he 
has simply produced opacity, than which no greater fault can be 
committed in glass-painting. 

I cannot conclude these remarks without expressing a hope 
that before this meeting separates some measures will be taken 
far cataloguing all the painted glass in the Cathedral and Parish 
Churches of York. A really correct and properly detailed cata- 
logue of the glass in the Cathedral alone would be a most 
valuable addition to our archaeological publications. Many of 
those windows are perfect histories in themselves ; and contain 
information which can hardly be collected elsewhere. Yet how 
little is known of them ! The French antiquaries have already 
made correct catalogues of the glass in many of their principal 
buildings ; and why should not their example be imitated in 
England ? we may be sure that the longer it is delayed the more 
difficult will become the task ; Time never sleeps, and in spite 
of all our precautions is perpetually destroying the evidences of 
history committed to so frail a material as glass. One of the 
principal obstacles to obtaining a correct catalogue of painted 
glass, the difficulty of procuring a person competent to the task, 
does not exist in the present case. I could have wished that 
Mr. Browne had in his own work given, what he is perfectly 
capable of making, a full and complete catalogue of the glass in 
the Cathedral ; but a very cursory examination of the windows 
has convinced me that he has exercised a sound discretion in 
declining such an undertaking on his own account. I repeat 
again that a good catalogue of the York glass would be an 
achievement worthy of the Institute, that it would stamp its 
proceedings with a character of usefulness, and perhaps induce 
other antiquarian societies to commence similar undertakings. 
The releading of painted windows in a careful manner, and 



insuring the retention of even every little fragment of original 
glass in its original position during the operation, is a work 
which cannot be too strongly advocated ; but at the same 
time can never supersede the necessity of making full and 
accurate catalogues, which may remain after the glass itself has 




Charles 'Winston, rlfil 

Thilip Delamotte.Jatho 

"Vincent BrocVks 





(From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at the Annual 
Meeting at Lincoln, 1848.) 

PROPOSE in this paper to give some account of 
the remains of ancient painted glass existing in 
Lincoln Cathedral and Southwell Minster. But 
as I have reason to believe that the subject of 
Glass-painting is far from being generally under- 
stood, and that it has not received that degree of 
attention which it deserves, whether considered 
as occupying a prominent place among the arts 
of the Middle Ages, or as an art which the taste of the present 
day has caused to be extensively revived, I shall venture to 
take a wider range than is absolutely necessary, and, instead of 
confining myself to a description of these remains,, combine with 
it such an account of the process of glass-painting, and of its 
past history and variations, as, by affording some knowledge of 
the practical details of the art, may remove an obstacle which, 
meeting the antiquary or amateur at his first entrance on the 
study of glass-painting, often deters him from pursuing the 
subject, or giving due attention to it. In conclusion, I shall 
offer a few remarks on the present practice of the art, and 
suggestions for removing some of the difficulties which beset its 

The art of Painting on Glass, which it may be proper to state 
is very different from the art of making coloured glass — an art 
of remote antiquity — was probably suggested by the very ancient 
practice of painting on earthenware with enamel, and the use 
of coloured glass in mosaics : but from the silence of classical 


authors on the subject, the absence of antique specimens, and 
the character of ancient buildings, as well domestic as public, 
it seems to have been invented subsequently to the coming of 
our Lord. Yet, although it cannot be carried back beyond the 
Christian era, the art is undoubtedly of considerable antiquity, 
as the Treatise on the subject, which is found in the second 
book of the ' Diversarum Artium Schedula ' of Theophilus, is of 
itself sufficient to prove. This treatise, which is as early as the 
tenth century, describes so perfect and complete a process of 
glass-painting, as to justify the conclusion that the art itself 
must have been invented at a much earlier period. 1 So per- 
fect, indeed, is the method given in the treatise (which has 
been rendered accessible to the general reader by the recent 
publication of a French and two English translations), 2 that it 
continued to be followed, without any material change, until 
almost the middle of the sixteenth century. But to however 
remote a period the invention of the art may be referred, the 
most ancient specimens of it which at present exist are not so 
early as even the tenth century. The oldest existing painted 
glass to which a date can, with certainty, be assigned, has been 
considered by M. de Lasteyrie, and other eminent French anti- 
quaries, to be the remains of the glass at St. Denys, which was 
painted in the middle of the twelfth century by order of Abbot 
Suger, who has left an interesting account of it. But it is not 
impossible that painted glass much earlier than this may be 
discovered ; indeed M. Gerente, an ingenious imitator of ancient 
painted glass, lately exhibited to me tracings made from some 
painted glass at Mans Cathedral, in France, which glass seemed 
to be as early as the latter part of the eleventh century. Theo- 
philus, in the treatise before mentioned, particularly extols the 
skill of the French glass-painters, and France is at this day the 
grand storehouse of painted glass of the earliest style. The 
little we possess in England is, however, not inferior in quality 
to the French glass. Some of the oldest glass in this country 
is part of a Jesse window in Canterbury Cathedral; and part 
of another Jesse in York Minster, which has been inserted into 
the tracery lights of the Decorated clearstory windows of the 

1 The art of glass-making is also de- ruins of Roman villas, and which has 

scribed in this treatise. The glass was a straight selvage, was made in this 

formed into a cylinder, and opened or manner. 

spread out into a sheet. Sheets so made 2 Those by Count De 1'Escalopier, 

have straight selvages. It is not im- by Mr. Heudrie, and in the appendix to 

probable that the glass found in the the ' Hints on Glass-painting.' 


nave. 1 All this glass is of the last half of the twelfth century ; 
so that the glass at York is older than any part of the existing 
edifice, with the exception of the crypt under the choir. And 
this is by no means a solitary instance of the original glass 
having been preserved when an old structure was pulled down 
and rebuilt in the Middle Ages. 

Having thus alluded to the probable antiquity of the art, and 
noticed a few of the most ancient specimens, I think it will be 
convenient briefly to describe what may be called Theophilus's 
System of Glass-painting and the alterations that were after- 
wards engrafted upon it ; since by so doing I shall give a general 
notion of the process of glass-painting, and show the chief sources 
of the varieties of style that are afterwards specified. 

As I shall have occasion to mention several different kinds 
of glass used in glass-painting, for the sake of perspicuity and 
brevity I will state that by White glass I mean glass which 
in the course of its manufacture has not intentionally been 
coloured ; that by Coloured glass I mean glass to which some 
colour has purposely been given in its manufacture ; that by 
Pot-metal glass I mean a particular kind of coloured glass, viz. 
glass coloured throughout its entire substance ; and that by 
Coated glass (which is sometimes, though inaccurately, called 
Flashed glass) I mean another kind of coloured glass, viz. glass 
coloured on one side only of the sheet. The glass-painter, it 
should be added, does not make the glass he paints ; though, at 
an early period, it would seem that he did so. 

The glass-painter, having made his design, which in the 
earliest period was drawn with lead, tin, or chalk on a board or 
table prepared for the purpose, transferred it to the glass in the 
following manner. He cut from the sheet pieces of white and 
coloured glass, corresponding in size and shape to those parts of 
the design which he intended to be white and coloured respect- 
ively, and fitted them accurately together, so as to form a piece 
of coarse mosaic work ; each colour of the design being repre- 
sented by a separate piece of glass. He then proceeded to paint 
the outlines and shadows of the design upon these pieces of 
glass, using for the purpose an Enamel colour, similar to that 
now known amongst glass-painters by the name of "Enamel 
Brown ;" and which, like any other enamel colour, is composed 
of two ingredients, — Flux, that is, soft glass which melts readily 

1 See Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at York ; paper on the 
Painted Gla-s, p. 71 ante. 


in the fire, and some kind of Colouring matter indestructible by 
heat. The next step was to subject the glass to the action of 
Red heat, in a kiln or furnace, in order to make the Enamel 
Brown attach itself to the glass by the melting of the flux ; and 
the process was completed by connecting together the various 
pieces of painted glass with lead-work, and setting up the glass 
painting in the window. A more simple method of producing 
a pictorial effect can hardly be imagined. The picture was 
coloured by using white and coloured glass ; its outlines, shadows, 
and diaper patterns alone were painted by the artist. In the 
early part of the fourteenth century the glass-painters dis- 
covered a means of Staining white glass yellow, and of im- 
parting a yellow tint to most kinds of coloured glass. The 
principal ingredient of the Yellow Stain is oxide or chloride of 
silver ; it imparts its tint to the glass — penetrating it a little 
way — on being exposed to the action of a red heat. A new 
mode of executing the shadows and diaper grounds with the 
Enamel Brown Avas adopted just before the close of the four- 
teenth century. Previously to this time, a coat of Enamel 
Brown was smeared over those parts only of the glass that were 
intended to be in shadow, the lights being left clear and un- 
touched ; but according to the new method, the Enamel Brown 
was spread all over the glass, and stippled l whilst moist to 
obliterate the marks of the brush and give smoothness to the 
coat; and the parts intended to represent the lights of the 
picture were afterwards restored to their original transparency 
by the removal of the enamel ground from off them. The first 
and oldest kind of shading may be called Smear shading, and 
the second Stipple shading ; the distinction being important to 
the antiquary and artist. Towards the middle of the fifteenth 
century a method was discovered of exhibiting to view patches 
of white glass in the midst of a coloured surface by the destruc- 
tion of corresponding portions of the coloured stratum of coated 
glass, an invention which facilitated the representation, in their 
proper colours, of heraldic bearings and other minute subjects; 
but this, being tedious and expensive in practice, was not exten- 
sively resorted to. At the beginning of the sixteenth century 
the introduction of another Enamel colour, rather redder in hue 

1 The stippling process was not a ently called " smear shading stippled," 

novelty: it was occasionally used, even to distinguish it both from the ordi- 

as early as the reign of Edward II., to nary "smear shading" and "stipple 

soften the effect of the smear shading, shading." 
Shading, so executed, may be conveni- 


than the Enamel Brown, may be noticed. It was chiefly used 
to heighten the complexions and to warm the flesh tint. No 
other innovations, however, on the system of Theophilus, which 
may with propriety be called the Mosaic System of Glass- 
painting, were made until the middle of the sixteenth century. 
The most gorgeous glass-paintings in existence, all which were 
executed during the first half of the sixteenth century, owe 
their plenitude of effect simply to the fuller development of the 
Mosaic system. 

In the middle of the sixteenth century, however, or in France 
and Flanders a few years earlier, it was discovered that all other 
colours besides yellow, brown, and light red, could be given to 
white glass by means of Enamel colours and the Stain ; and 
thus the artist became in a measure independent of the glass- 
maker for colouring glass. But the introduction of the Enamel 
System of Glass-painting, as this may be called, did not imme- 
diately lead to the disuse of coloured glass ; the enamels being 
at first employed either to colour those parts of the design 
which, from the difficulty of leading in pieces of coloured 
glass, must otherwise have remained uncoloured, or improperly 
coloured; or to heighten the tint of the coloured glass. The 
joint operation, however, of colouring glass by means of enamels, 
and the disuse of glass-paintings on an extended scale, led, at 
last, to the abandon ment of the manufacture of coloured glass in 
France, and to its great deterioration in this kingdom and else- 
where. Le Yieil informs us that in 1768 no coloured glass 
was made in France. 1 In England the Pot-metals continued to 
be made, but the manufacture of Coated glass appears to have 
ceased towards the latter part of the seventeenth century. I 
have not met with any example of Buby glass, i. e. Coated Bed 
glass, later than that in the east window of Lincoln Cathedral, 
which was executed by Peckitt in 1762. It is of very inferior 
quality, but not worse than what was made some sixty years 
before. The manufacture of Buby, 2 as well as of other kinds of 

1 ' L'Art de la Peinture sur Verre et lation of Otto Fromberg's < Handbuch 
de la Vitrei-ie, par feu Le Vieil/ p. 84. der Glasnialerei,' in Weale's Quarterly 

2 A careful mi'- .scopical examination Papers; and Lardner's 'Porcelain and 
of several specimens of modern and Glass Manufacture,' p. 276.1 The in- 
ancient " ruby glass " has convinced me gredients for making ruby glass are 
that the old was manufactured in the mentioned amongst the receipts for 
same manner as the new. colouring glass given in Neri, ' De Arte 

The red colour is clearly ascertained Vitraria,,' in the French work of Blan- 

to be producible by copper in a high court, and also in the 'Mappa Clavi- 

state of oxidation. [See Clarke's trans- cula,' a MS. of the 10th century 



Coatocl glass, was revived in France about twenty years ago ; 
l)ut its having lain dormant for a period, together with the 
deteriorated quality of Pot-metal glass, have given rise to a 
belief that the art of glass-painting, as formerly practised, has 
been lost. This belief is fast wearing out, but its effect is still 
felt in the propensity to be satisfiad with a glass-painting, what- 
ever may be its demerits as a work of art, provided it exhibits 
bright and striking colours. 

The very changes which have taken place in the practice of 
the art thus afford, of themselves, a means of ascertaining the 
age of any particular glass-painting; but in consequence of the 
length of time during which each mode was practised, they do 
not present any precise evidence of date, nor do they furnish 
the means of a classification sufficiently discriminating in other 
respects. We are, therefore, obliged to look amongst minute 
details for the distinguishing characteristics of the successive 
periods of glass-painting, and to found upon them, in conjunction 
with the changes above-mentioned, the division of the art into 
those several styles which, together with a brief notice of some 
of their peculiarities, I shall presently enumerate. 

Theophilus's, or the Mosaic System of Glass-painting, con- 
tinued to be followed, as already stated, until about the middle 
of the sixteenth century, and thus comprehends all the niedireval 

printed in the 23rd vol. of the ' Archaeo- 1.3th or lGth century, in one of the 
logia,' p. 183 et seq. See the chapters windows of the tower called " Cook's 
cclvii., cclviii, entitled, ' Confeetio Folly," near Clifton : and no doubt 
vitri rubri.' None of these authors, many others exist. Peckitt's ruby was, 
however, describe the mode of form- I am sure, manufactm-ed exactly as 
ing the glass into sheets. The chapter above described ; the failure of the red 
in the treatise of Theophilus, which, and the green tint imparted to the 
from its heading, 'De Vitro quod glass in places are defects not unfre- 
vocatur Gallien,' we may suppose bore quently exhibited by more ancient spe- 
on the subject, is lost. [See ' Hints on cimens, and may easily be accounted for. 
Glass-painting,' p. 311.] There can be A new kind of ruby glass, which, for 
no doubt, however, that ruby glass was convenience sake, may be called " ena- 
anciently formed into sheets, as it is melled ruby," has lately been manu- 
now, by blowing a lump of white glass, factured by Mr. Hartley. The colour- 
covered with a coat of ruby, into a ing matter is spread, with a brush, over 
hollow sphere, which was afterwards the surface of a sheet of yellow or white 
converted into a flat sheet in the usual glass, to which it becomes united, like 
way. A specimen of ruby glass, of the a transparent enamel, on exposure to a 
13th century, exhibiting the mark of a sufficient heat in a kiln. A similar 
" punt," or " bull's eye," is described process is described, as applicable to 
in the 'Hints on Glass-painting,' p. other colours, in ' L'Art de la Peinture 
341. This, in connection with other sur Verre et de Vitrerie, par feu Le 
circumstances, is decisive as to the mode Vieil,' part 2, ch. 3. It is clear that 
of manufacture. I have met with a the ancient ruby was not manufactured 
similar instance, but not older than the in this manner. 


varieties ; and those varieties may be conveniently divided into 
styles, like the varieties of media3val architecture, and in like 
manner may be classed under the head of the Early English 
style, the Decorated style, &c. 

The Early English style includes all glass-paintings executed 
prior to 1280. Some works of this period I have already men- 
tioned, when speaking of the antiquity of glass-painting. The 
great Rose or Wheel window of the transept of the cathedral of 
this city also belongs to it. The description which I shall pre- 
sently give of this window will afford an opportunity of indicating 
some of the characteristic features of the style, and it will also 
serve to illustrate the arrangement which is usual in similar 
works of this age. I therefore abstain from entering at all into 
these particulars at present. 

The Decorated style prevailed from 1280 to 1380. There 
are numerous and excellent specimens of this style in England, 
though hardly any remains belonging to it are found in Lincoln 
Cathedral. As early examples, I may mention the painted 
glass in the choir of Merton College Chapel, Oxford ; in the 
Chapter-house at York; in the chancel of Norbury Church, 
Derbyshire, &c. : and as later examples, the glass in the choir 
o f Bristol Cathedral ; in the nave of York Cathedral ; in Stan- 
ford Church, Northamptonshire ; in the east window of Glou- 
cester Cathedral, &c. The earlier examples of this style are 
distinguished from the Early English principally by the archi- 
tectural details of the canopy-work (a common accompaniment 
to Decorated picture glass-paintings), and the flowing tendril 
scrollages and naturally-formed leaves in the ornamental pat- 
terns. The later examples, in addition to these peculiarities, 
generally exhibit the Yellow Stain, and are also less intense in 
colour compared with Early English glass-paintings. In all 
Decorated painted glass, the outline is usually less strong, and 
the drawing less vigorous, than the Early English. 

The Perpendicular style prevailed from 1380 to 1530. In 
the choir of York Minster is an excellent series of examples, 
extending from the last quarter of the fourteenth century to 
about the middle of the fifteenth. There are also some good 
early remains in the Antechapel of New College, Oxford ; and 
later ones at Malvern Church, Worcestershire ; and especially 
at Fairford Church, Gloucestershire, the painted windows of 
which edifice are of the early part of the sixteenth century r I 
may also mention another well-known example, rather earlier 
than the glass at Fairford, — the windows of the north aisle of 

a 2 


Cologne Cathedral. The grand characteristics which distinguish 
Perpendicular glass-paintings from Early English and Decorated, 
are greater breadths of unbroken colour, tints of diminished 
intensity, and the introduction of a greater proportion of white 
glass even in the most richly-coloured pictures. The later 
examples, as at Fairford, are often highly picturesque in treat- 
ment and design. The foliaged ornaments, the devices on the 
quarries, of which the ornamented patterns in this style are 
formed, are highly conventional and unnatural in form, and the 
style of execution is very delicate and finished. The Stipple 
Shading is also an important feature in glass-paintings of tin's 
style, and will often enable the student to determine whether a 
particular example is Perpendicular or Decorated. 

The style which succeeded the Perpendicular, after having 
been for nearly thirty years concurrent with it, I have called 
the Cinquecento. It prevailed from the beginning of the 
sixteenth century until the general introduction of Enamel 
colours, about the middle of that century. The character of 
the ornamental details — whence the name of the style — is of 
itself sufficient to distinguish Cinquecento from Perpendicular 
glass-paintings, in which the Gothic details are followed. In 
other respects it would not be easy to draw the line between the 
later examples of the one style and the earlier examples of 
the other ; the same mode of execution being used in each. The 
finest specimens of Cinquecento glass-paintings are amongst 
the works of the Flemish school ; these possess a power and 
a richness in comparison with which the French and English 
examples appear weak and timid. There are some splendid 
specimens of the style at Lichfield Cathedral, brought from the 
neighbourhood of Liege in the early part of the present century. 
The east window of St. Margaret's, Westminster, which has all 
the appearance of being Flemish, is another splendid work ; but 
perhaps no windows so fully impress the spectator with the 
power of painted glass as those of the chapel of the Miraculous 
Sacrament, on the north side of Brussels Cathedral. 

It seems unnecessary to enter into any lengthened remarks 
on the styles of glass-painting which have prevailed from the 
Cinquecento period until within the last twenty years ; for 
with the exception of the east window of the choir of Lincoln, 
there is no example here to which such remarks can apply ; 
and this, being a kaleidoscope of plain pieces of glass, need not 
be further noticed. Such glass-paintings are in general easily 
to be distinguished from the Cinquecento by the Enamel 


colouring which is used in them ; as well as by their dullness 
and opacity in several instances, and by their washiness and 
flimsiness in others. The last defect is most apparent in those 
specimens in which the use of white glass coloured'with enamels, 
instead of coloured glass, has prevailed to the greatest extent. 
The best English examples of the combined use of Enamel 
colouring and Coloured glass are the works of the Van Linges, 
in the first half of the seventeenth century, and those of the 
Prices in the early part of the eighteenth. It cannot be denied 
that a very powerful pictorial effect is produced by many of 
these works ; yet even in the most favourable examples we seek 
in vain for that sparkling brilliancy and translucency which 
characterise the equally powerful glass-paintings of the Cinque- 
cento period, and indeed constitute the chief beauty of a glass- 
painting. The poverty of glass-paintings in which the colouring 
is wholly produced by enamels is well exemplified in the 
" washy Virtues " at New College Chapel, Oxford, and in the 
windows of Arundel Castle, Sussex. 

The preceding outline, however imperfect, of the progress 
of glass-painting, and of the styles under which the ancient 
varieties are classed, will enable us to enter upon an exami- 
nation of the windows of this Cathedral and of Southwell 
Minster ; and in the course of it I shall occasionally introduce 
a few remarks which may serve to illustrate what has before 
been said. 

The glass of the Early English style remaining in the 
cathedral is, I think, of the first half of the thirteenth century. 
The great Kose or Wheel window in the north transept must 
be admitted to be one of the most splendid, and, in its present 
state, one of the most perfect, works of the thirteenth century. 1 
It is much to be regretted that no engraving exists of this 
window ; the want of accurate prints of entire windows is, in- 
deed, a serious obstacle to the study of ancient glass. 2 One only 

1 For a description of this window, sufficiently perfect to satisfy the student, 
and of the subjects in it, see the Memoir Even in the short list which follows, 
on the glazing of the North Rose some imperfect specimens are neces- 
Window of Lincoln Cathedral. The de- sarily included. In the choir of Canter- 
scription which was contained in the bury Cathedral are many good speci- 
present memoir, being in some respects mens of Early Euglish Medallion 
imperfect, is omitted. windows, and considerable remains of 

2 Such has been the destruction or Figure and Canopy, and Jesse windows, 
mutilation of the works of the English Lincoln Cathedral has the splendid 
school of Glass-painting, that it is dim- north Kose above mentioned. Salisbury 
cult to form a series of entire windows, Cathedral contains some excellent Early 
or of considerable portions of windows, English white Pattern windows. Later 



of the subjects, the Angels supporting the Cross, has been 
engraved, but not accurately, in Fowler's 'Mosaic Pavements 

examples of the same kind are afforded 
by the Five Sisters at York, and the 
east window of Chetwode Church, 
Berks ; iu the last, the effect of intro- 
ducing pictures into a white pattern 
may be seen. The five-light east 
window of Sailing Church, Kent, is a 
Decorated white pattern, with pictures 
inserted, of the latter part of the reign 
of Edward I. The east window of 
Checkley Church, Staffordshire, bears a 
considerable resemblance to the last. 
The side windows of Merton Chapel, 
Oxford, are white Pattern windows, 
with pictures inserted, of the latter part 
of Edward I. 'a reign ; and the head of 
the east window is a rich specimen of 
decorative colouring. The windows of 
the Chapter-house at York are early in 
the reign of Edward II. They consist 
of white patterns with pictures inserted. 
The side windows of the chancel of 
Xorbury Church, Derbyshire, are of the 
same date and general design as the 
last, but contain shields of arms instead 
of pictures. The head of the east 
window of Froyle Church, Hants, is an 
excellent specimen of heraldic decora- 
tion, of the latter part of the reign of 
Edward II. Of the same date are the 
Figure and Canopy windows in the 
choir of Tewkesbury Church, and in the 
clearstory of the choir of Wells Cathe- 
dral ; as well as the Jesse east window 
of the same cathedral. This window, 
though more perfect, is inferior in de- 
sign to the Jesse east window of Bristol 
Cathedral, the date of which is about 
] 330. The west window of York nave 
is a Figure and Canopy window, early 
in the reign of Edward III. ; and amongst 
the side windows, which consist chiefly 
of white patterns with pictures inserted, 
may be enumerated a Jesse, and some 
Figure and Canopy windows, all being 
of the early part of the same reign. St. 
Denis Church, York, has a Figure and 
Canopy window late in the reign of 
Edward III. ; of which date is the mag- 
nificent east window of Gloucester 
Cathedral. It consists chiefly of figures 
and canopies, and partly of white pat- 
terns. The east window of Levrington 

Church, Cambridgeshire, is a very early 
Perpendicular Jesse. The Antechapel 
of New College, Oxford, contains several 
Figure and Canopy windows of the 
reign of Richard II. There are some 
equally early examples in the clearstory 
of York choir. Indeed, the choir of 
this Cathedral is a perfect mine of Per- 
pendicular glass, varying in date from 
this time to the reign of Henry VI. ; 
and comprising iu its aisles a Jesse 
window, as well as windows whose de- 
sign, like the east window, consists of a 
number of small pictures placed one 
over the other. St. Martin's Church, 
York, has a west window full of small 
pictures, and clearstory windows with 
figures and arms, on quarry grounds, 
of the time of Henry VI. The Hall 
windows of Ockwell's House, Berks, are 
filled with heraldic achievements of the 
middle of the fifteenth century, consist- 
ing of shields, mantlings, &c, of the 
boldest and most striking design. Good 
Pattern windows of the latter part of 
this century may be seen in the Hall of 
the Bede House, Lyddington, Rutland- 
shire ; and in the Dean's Chapel, Can- 
terbury' Cathedral. Fairford Church, 
Gloucestershire, contains a number of 
Picture windows, of various designs, of 
the early part of the sixteenth century, 
which deserve the greatest attention. 
King's Chapel, Cambridge, is full of 
early Cinquecento Picture windows. 
The east window of Bowness Church, 
Westmoreland, also belongs to this 
style; as well as the beautiful Jesse at 
Llanrhaidr Church, Denbighshire, and 
the east window of St. Margaret's, 
Westminster. The east window of Peter- 
house Chapel, Cambridge, is a favour- 
able specimen of the style which suc- 
ceeded the Cinquecento. Of the works 
of the Van Eiuges there are abund- 
ance at Oxford, particularly in the 
cathedral ; and in Lincoln's Inn Chapel. 
The east window of St. Andrew's, Hol- 
born, which was painted by Price, is 
deserving of notice. This list might be 
greatly increased by adding more muti- 
lated, though hardly less valuable, spe- 
cimens to it. 

PL4TE 11. 






and Painted Glass.' No other portion of the Early English 
glass is in its original position. It is clear that the white 
patterns which fill the five windows immediately below the 
north Eose have been removed from other windows ; and tbe 
same remark applies to the contents of both the lowest north 
windows of the transept. In the westernmost of these two 
windows, near the bottom, the figures of five angels, playing on 
musical instruments, have been inserted. These are late De- 
corated, of excellent character, and belong in all probability 
to the west window of the nave. Most of the glass in the 
southern Rose is Early English, collected from other windows : 
a collection of various pieces of Early English glass, chiefly 
pictures, likewise fills the other four south windows of the 
transept. The lower lights of the east windows of the north 
and south choir aisles are also filled with a similar collection 
of Early English glass-paintings ; amongst which are some 
Medallions, representing, according to the opinion of Mr. E. J. 
Willson, of Lincoln, incidents in the life of St. Hugh of 
Lincoln. St. Hugh died Bishop of Lincoln in 1200, and was 
canonised by Pope Honorius III. in 1220. I am informed 
by Mr. Willson that this glass was removed about sixty years 
ago from the windows of the aisles of the nave to its present 
resting-place ; and that a chantry in a chapel adjoining the 
nave, having an altar dedicated to St. Hugh, was founded by 
Bishop Hugh de Welles, who died in 1235. The glass exhibits 
internal evidence of being of corresponding date. It is easv to 
recognise in these remains those striking features which indicate 
the Early English style of glass-painting ; such as the extraor- 
dinary intensity and vividness of the colours, the strength and 
boldness of the outline, the tallness of the figures, their vigorous 
and spirited attitudes, and classical air of their heads ; also the 
conventional character of the foliaged ornaments, as displayed in 
the borders and white patterns, and which resemble the orna- 
ments of the contemporary sculpture. The north Pose, which 
has been already described, also exhibits the general principles of 
comjjosition common to any Early English window that contains 
a number of pictures. Each picture, the design of which is 
always very simple, is placed in a panel having a stiff-coloured 
ground and well-defined border. The panels are also embedded 
in a stiff-coloured ground. Very little white glass is used, 
so that the window consists of a mass of rich and variegated 
colouring, of which the predominant tints are those of the 
grounds. The design, owing to the smallness of its parts, is 


confused when seen from the floor of the transept. The various 
panels which have been inserted into the other windows, no 
doubt, once formed integral parts of Medallion windows. 
The north Rose shows the general effect of a Medallion 
window ; and some idea of its design is conveyed by the modern 
imitation window in the south aisle of the cathedral. The 
original ironwork of a Medallion window still remains in the 
first window from the west in the south aisle of the nave, and 
may be regarded as indicating what were the principal divisions 
of the design of the glass-painting. 

Tli ere are a few fragments of Decorated glass of the time ot 
Edward II. in the tracery lights of the first window from 
the east of the south aisle of the choir, and a little more, 
somewhat earlier, in one or two of the windows of the opposite 
aisle. The east window of the choir has been deprived of its 
original glazing. It appears, from a note taken of it a few years 
previous to the Rebellion, and brought to my notice by the 
Venerable the Archdeacon, that it contained the arms of many 
of the English nobility ; from which circumstance it may be 
inferred, that the original glass was early Decorated, or at all 
events of transitional character ; heraldry not being found in 
the more ancient examples of Early English glass. A portion of 
a late Early English white pattern is inserted in the east window 
of the chapter-house at Southwell. It has been engraved in 
Shaw's ' Ornaments.' 

The glass which fills the upper tracery lights of the west 
window of the nave of Lincoln is late Decorated, a little later, 
perhaps, than the middle of the fourteenth century. The five 
angels, already mentioned as being in one of the lower windows 
of the north transept, are of the same date as this : they most 
probably formed part of the west window. This window, 
judging from the forms of the foliaged scroll-work remaining in 
its tracery lights and round the angels, seems to have been 
a Jesse window. The Smear Shading in the angels and foliaged 
ornaments deserves attention. I should here notice a small 
piece of the foliaged scroll-work belongs to this window, which 
has been inserted in the Decorated south Rose window, near the 
bottom of its eastern side ; because tins glass, when compared 
with the surrounding Early English glass, betrays, by the light- 
ness of its effect, the great difference in texture that certainly 
exists between Decorated and Early English glass. 1 

1 I am thus minute in noticing speci- manner, the difference in texture be- 
mens calculated to show, in a striking tween glass of different dates, because, 


At Southwell Minster, in the chapter-house, are some few 
remnants of early Decorated glass of the reign of Edward I. 
They consist chiefly of portions of tracery lights, and of the 
spires and crockets of canopies belonging to the lower lights. 
These crockets are identical in form with those carved in stone 
round the chapter-house. In one of the tracery lights of the 
second window from the east, on the south, is a small medallion 
of white glass, on which is represented a knight on hoseback, 
tilting, with a long spear under his arm. He is habited in 
a long surcoat which reaches below the knees, and is armed in a 
hauberk, and chausses of mail. His helmet is surmounted with 
a crest resembling the wing of a bird. In one of the opposite 
windows are remains of heraldic borders, consisting of the 
yellow castles of Castile, and of a white lion rampant on a red 

The Perpendicular remains of glass in Lincoln Cathedral are 
but trifling. Three small circles emblematic of the months of 
March, April, and July, are inserted in the midst of the principal 
tracery lights of the east windows of the south and north aisles 
of the choir. A head in this style has also been supplied to the 
lowest of the five Decorated angels already mentioned as being 
in one of the north windows of the transept ; in this head, as 
well as in the other Perpendicular work, Stipple Shading is used. 
An heraldic border, composed of small parallelograms of white 
glass, each bearing a black chevron between three black crosses 
botonne, and a black border with yellow pellets, remains in the 
central lower light of the third window from the east of the 
north choir aisle. I suspect that these parallelograms were 
originally separated from each other by small pieces of plain 
coloured glass. They are, I think, of the middle of the fifteenth 

At Southwell, the remains of Perpendicular glass are equally 
scanty, being confined to a few late shields of arms, and other 
fragments, in the west window of the nave. The four lower 
east Avindows of the choir of this building are filled with Cinque- 
cento glass-paintings, of the French school, the gift of the late 
Mr. Gaily Knight, in 1818, and which represent the Baptism of 
Christ, the Raisiug of Lazarus, the Triumphant Entry into 
Jerusalem, and the Mocking of Christ by the Jews. The first 
subject, considered as a glass-painting, is rather poor, being weak 

of all differences, this is the least appre- will agree that it is one of the most 
oiable by casual observers, though all important, 
who have studied ancient painted glass 


both in colour and shadow. The whole of this picture below the 
knees of our Saviour is a modern addition, by the late Mr. Miller, 
who adapted the glass to the present lights. The three other 
subjects are effective and good, particularly the second, in which, 
by a skilful management of the background, a striking effect of 
distance and aerial perspective is produced. The third, as a 
composition of colour, is perhaps the best. These windows, 
though less powerful, are more brilliant than Flemish glass- 
paintings of the same period. As pictures, they go far to estab- 
lish the claim of glass-painting to be considered one of the fine 

If glass-painting could be considered merely as an object 
of antiquarian curiosity, I should here terminate my remarks 
on the subject ; but as it is a practical art, and as the principal 
motive for investigating its past condition and history is a 
desire to advance and improve its present cultivation, I trust 
that few of those who interest themselves in the study will think 
that I am abusing the present occasion, if I proceed to offer 
some observations on the best mode of developing its resources, 
and carrying it onwards to perfection. 

It will not be denied, I think, that the glass-paintiugs which 
have been executed for churches w r ithin the last twenty years, 
with few exceptions, leave very great room for improvement. 
To include all these works under one common condemnation 
would no doubt be unjust, yet it must be admitted that hardly 
any, even of those most recently executed, can be considered 
satisfactory, or worthy the cost that has been expended on them, 
except perhaps so far as they may have been the means of 
bringing the Mosaic system of glass-painting l again into favour. 
They are for the most part servile but faulty imitations of older 
examples; and, like copies in general, magnify the defects of 
their originals without seizing upon their excellences. 

These evils are in great measure attributable to a habit 
amongst the patrons of glass-painting, of being satisfied with any 
w< >rk that in their opinion possesses a chance of being mistaken 
for an original example. Hence exactness of imitation is all that 
is aimed at, and glass-painters are led to value ancient glass- 
paintings only so far as they supply a means of making copies ; 
instead of endeavouring to penetrate into their principles, and 
found upon them a new and consistent style of glass-painting — 

1 The superiority of the Mosaic system over all others is attempted to be 
shown in the ' Hints on Glass-painting,' part ii. section 2. 


an object for which the ancient examples are deserving of the 
closest study. 

The ground on which an exact imitation of Gothic glass- 
paintings is generally and most plausibly maintained is an 
opinion that they harmonize with Gothic architecture, and that 
no others are capable of doing so. It is important therefore, as 
well for those who advocate the system of servile imitation, as 
for those who would free artists from the fetters which this 
system imposes, to inquire in what respects, and how far, Gothic 
glass-paintings do harmonize with Gothic architecture ; whether 
we have the means of obtaining, by mere imitation of them, that 
degree of harmony which they may be found to possess, and 
whether the desired harmony is best to be obtained by a more 
independent process. 

When it is said that glass-paintings ought to harmonize with 
the architecture with which they are united, the meaning is that 
they should assist and heighten the effect of the architecture, 
and present no features at variance with it. To produce this 
result, agreeably to the ordinary rules which govern other kinds 
of decoration, — for a glass-painting, as well as a fresco-painting, 
is undoubtedly a species of decoration, — a certain degree of con- 
gruity is necessary between the glass-painting and the architec- 
ture and sculpture, in their general character and composition. 
A glass-painting intended for a church should possess a graver 
character than one intended for a secular building, and the 
ornaments, figures, and draperies represented in a Picture glass- 
painting should resemble those in the sculpture in style and 
general excellence. Moreover, if the interior of the building, or 
even the particular situation of the window, be dark and obscure, 
the glass-painting ought to exhibit a predominance of deep hues ; 
if light, a lighter cast of colour in the work might be preferable. 
If the character of the architecture be cheerful, the tone of the 
glass-painting should be warm ; if sombre and melancholy, the 
tone of the glass-painting should be cold. Thus, buildings 
having dark interiors, as Westminster Abbey, or St. Paul's 
Cathedral, would require more powerfully coloured glass- 
paintings than the choir of Southwell Minster, or the church of 
St. Clement Danes, in the Strand ; but as the character of Gothic 
architecture is sombre and melancholy compared with that of 
the Greek and Italian, glass-paintings designed for Westminster 
Abbey, or Southwell Minster, should be colder in tone than 
those designed for St. Paul's or St. Clement Danes. In like 
manner, windows situated in the dome of St. Paul's* or the 


transept of Lincoln Cathedral, might require to be more deeply- 
coloured than the windows in the choir of St. Paul's, or in the 
choir of Lincoln ; yet the tone of colouring that would har- 
monize with any part of Lincoln Cathedral would be colder and 
more grave than that which would suit any part of St. Paul's. 

Tested by these rules, Gothic glass-paintings will be found, in 
some respects, to harmonize with the Gothic edifices that were 
contemporaneous with them. They harmonize with the sculp- 
ture in the form of their foliaged ornaments, heraldry, &c. ; and 
(except perhaps in the latest examples) with the grave and 
sombre character of the architecture, in the simplicity and cold 
tone of their colouring. All glass-paintings earlier than the 
last quarter of the fifteenth century are more or less cold in 
colour : and it is a circumstance worthy of remark, though it 
seems to result from accident rather than design, that, in pro- 
portion as Gothic architecture became less gloomy and sombre, 
Gothic glass-paintings, generally speaking, became not only 
lighter in hue, but less cold in tone. Thus we find that the 
glass-paintings which were contemporary with the Early English 
and Early Decorated styles of architecture (which have a more 
sombre air than any of the succeeding Gothic styles of architec- 
ture) are in general the coldest in tone. This arises from the 
green hue of the white glass, and the peculiar tints of the other 
colours (which may perhaps be affected in some degree by the 
hue of the white glass that forms their basis), as the crimson 
tinted Ruby, the cold though rich Pot-metal yellow, and the 
green hue which corrects the violet in the blue glass. The 
yellow stain, though it enriched the effect of the early Decorated 
glass-paintings, can hardly be said to have diminished their 
coldness of tone, for it always partook of the hue of the white 
glass. It was not until nearly the end of the fifteenth century, 
at which time the sombreness of Gothic architecture had greatly 
diminished, if not entirely disappeared, that we perceive in 
painted glass anything approaching warmth of tone. Indeed, 
even as late as the beginning of the fifteenth century, examples 
are to be seen hardly less cold than Early English glass- 
paintings. Agaiu, though it would be difficult to prove that, 
in proportion as Gothic interiors became less dark and obscure, 
a preference was given to windows wholly or principally com- 
posed of white patterns, it cannot be denied that, as Gothic 
interiors became, by reason of the increased size and number of 
their windows, more light, the Picture glass-paintings themselves 
not only contained a less quantity of coloured and a greater 


proportion of white and yellow stained glass, but eventually 
their colours individually became less intense in hue. The glass 
used in all Early English glass-paintings, whether white or 
coloured, is, owing to its peculiar texture, remarkable for intensity 
of hue. Even a white Pattern window of the Early English 
style has a solidity of effect, arising from the strong rich green 
tint and porcelain-like nature of its material, that would seem 
but ill calculated to accord with a lighter style of architecture 
than the Early English. Nothing could harmonize better with 
the character of the north transept of York than the "Five 
Sisters." But the deepest colouring known in painted glass 
occurs in Early English Picture windows, especially in the 
earlier examples. In these windows but little white glass is 
used, and this generally is of a strong green tint ; deep blues 
and reds predominate, and the lighter shades of colour, as 
pink, purple, and violet, possess a relative degree of strength. 
The colour of each picture is, in principle, simple and grave. 
The flesh-colour is deep ; the draperies are stiff patches of white 
or coloured glass, not designedly varying in depth; and the 
figure or group is usually backed with a stiff blue or red ground. 
Landscapes with a gradually tinted sky never occur. The 
general appearance of the window is a mass of variegated and 
brilliant colouring of the deepest hue and most solemn tone. 
Decorated Picture windows, however, though they exhibit the 
same simple and grave principle of colouring, and though, at 
least in the earlier examples of them, tints often occur indi- 
vidually as intense as those of an Early English window, are, 
owing to the greater infusion of white glass into their design, 
considerably lighter in their general appearance than Early 
English Picture windows. Progressive changes in the manu- 
facture of the glass tended to dimmish its intense hue and 
apparently dense texture, but this, so far from checking- the 
employment of white glass in Picture glass-paintings, had the re- 
verse effect ; as is shown by the Picture glass-paintings of the 
Perpendicular style, in which there is always a much greater 
proportion of white glass than is seen in Decorated examples. 
The palest Picture glass-paintings are those of the latter half of 
the fifteenth century, in which, in connection with a light cast 
of colouring, the principle of employing a large proportion of 
white glass is carried to the fullest extent. 

But the harmony between Gothic Picture glass-paintings and 
Gothic architecture does not seem to extend beyond what has 
been stated. It is clear that these glass-paintings, in order 


perfectly to harmonize with the architecture, ought to be iu all 
respects as refined and advanced, in point of art, as the architec- 
ture and sculpture are. It can, however, be easily proved that 
Gothic Picture glass-paintings of every period are very inferior 
in design and execution to the buildings and architectural 
ornaments with which they are associated. But it will be suffi- 
cient to point out the incongruity, in some respects, of Early 
English Picture glass-paintings and Early English architecture, 
since these are the most popular styles of painted glass and 
Gothic architecture, and between which the greatest degree of 
harmony is usually supposed to exist. 

A favourable specimen of Early English architecture suggests, 
at least to ordinary observers, no incompleteness either in the 
character and proportions of the architecture itself, or in the form 
of its conventional ornaments. Yet any representation of the 
human figure, when attempted in the sculpture, is immediately 
perceived to be palpably incorrect both in its proportions and 
details, defects easily accounted for when we consider the 
peculiar study which the human form demands, and recollect 
that in the thirteenth century — to use the words of Flaxman — 
" the sculptor could not be instructed in anatomy, for there were 
no anatomists." l 

On examining an Early English Picture glass-painting, we find 
the human form still less correctly rendered than in the sculpture, 
which is not surprising, because, at a time when the laws of Per- 
spective were unknown, it was more difficult to draw correctly 
than to model. In this respect, therefore, there is a want of 
harmony between the glass and the architecture. But the 
inferiority of Early English Picture glass-paintings to Early 
English architecture is apparent in many other particulars. 
For instance, that flagrant violation of the rule of composition 
that regulates the size and complication of ornaments by the 
distance from which they are intended to be seen, which is 
so common in Early English Medallion windows, rarely, if ever, 
occurs in Early English architecture or sculpture. 2 Again, the 
figures, and canopies, and alto-reliefs that adorn Early English 

1 Lectures on Sculpture, p. 15. on so small a scale, that it is difficult 

2 The figures of the alto-reliefs repre- to make out its component parts from 
senting the General Resurrection, which the floor of the cathedral, even with a 
occupy the upper part of the west front pocket telescope. It is true that the 
i if Wells Cathedral, are distinctly visible glass is Early Decoi-ated, and tlie sculp- 
from below; yet the same subject, ture Early English, yet the comparison 
which occupies the lower lights of the may be fairly made. 

east window of the choir, is executed 


architecture, are remarkable for their boldness and prominence, 
for strongly contrasted lights and shadows, and deep under- 
cuttings ; yet in Early English glass-paintings the pictures are, 
on the contrary, remarkable for their excessive flatness. The 
canopy, for instance, conveys scarcely any other idea than that of 
a border to the coloured ground in which the figure is imbedded ; 
and in the medallion pictures, the objects in the background 
are universally represented in the same plane with the group in 
the foreground. This flatness, being unintentional, as clearly 
appears from the abortive attempts made to overcome it, can 
only be regarded as a defect, and a further proof of the incom- 
pleteness of Early English Picture glass-paintings, in comparison 
with Early English architecture and sculpture. It is otherwise 
with Early English Pattern glass-paintings; they are but a 
species of mere surface decoration, and their flatness is perfectly 
consistent with the nature of their design. 

It could easily be shown that all other Gothic Picture glass- 
paintings disagree with the contemporary architecture in many 
respects ; but it is unnecessary to pursue the inquiry further to 
justify the conclusion, that, although Gothic Pattern glass- 
paintings may be considered to harmonize with Gothic architec- 
ture, Gothic Picture glass-paintings do so but imperfectly. It 
of course follows that the modern imitations of the latter, even 
if they were exact, cannot harmonize with the architecture, 
since the originals do not. But the observations which I shall 
now proceed to make on the nature of modern glass will show 
that these imitations cannot be exact; and that all imitations of 
Gothic glass-paintings, whether patterns or pictures, and more 
especially those of the earlier styles, will be deficient in that part 
of harmony which is dependent on the tone and colouring of the 
work : the imitations of Picture glass-paintings thus failing 
of the desired harmony on two accounts. 

It has been stated in a former part of this paper, that various 
changes in the texture of the glass itself took place at various 
periods in the history of the art, and that the nature of the 
material is always, to a certain extent, characteristic of the age 
of the glass-painting. Therefore, in order to make an exact copy 
of any ancient glass-painting, we must possess either a material 
identical with that of which it is composed, or something equiva- 
lent to it. Down to the present time, however, the glass manu- 
facturers have not succeeded in reproducing a material identical 
with that even of the sixteenth century, which is less honioge- 


neous, and, consequently, apparently denser in its texture, 1 than 
modern glass. The modern imitations of the still earlier kinds 
of glass are, as might be expected, still less successful. Every 
exi^edient that has yet been tried has produced but a slight 
approximation to what is required. No material having the 
porcelain character, richness, and gem-like brilliancy of the 
glass of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, has yet been 
made. The modern glass is all too clear and homogeneous in 
texture, and too uniform in depth or shade of colour. Modern 
Ruby glass is poor in comparison with the rich streaky Ruby 
glass of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries; and the " Rolled" 
Pot-metal and white glass, being of uniform thickness all over, 
have none of the richness and vivacity of the ancient Pot-metal 
and white glass, which, having been blown in a rude inartificial 
manner, are very irregular in thickness, and, consequently, 
exhibit corresponding varieties or shades of tint. Thus, it is 
evident that, until the manufacture of the ancient material is 
effectually revived, — and against this there are obstacles more 
numerous and formidable than would at first be supposed, 2 — 
modern imitations of ancient painted windows, and especially 
of those belonging to the earlier styles, must necessarily be more 
or less faulty. 

A comparison of the modern imitation of an Early English 
Medallion window, lately put up in Lincoln Cathedral, with the 
genuine Early English glass remaining in the transept and choir 
windows, will show the fruitlessness of attempting to reproduce 
an Early English Picture design in modern glass. In order, no 
doubt, to correct the thinness of the modern material, and to 
give it as much as possible the apparent substance of the old, the 
glass in the modern window I am speaking of has been covered 
with a coat of Enamel Brown paint: an expedient which, though 
it perfectly destroys the brilliancy of the glass, fails in its object 
to impart to the window the requisite depth and solidity. The 
window is flimsy, as well as dull in appearance ; its colours have 
none of the gravity and gem-like brilliancy of the old ones; 

1 I use the expression apparent den- glass ; and perhaps to a different kind 
sity, because, in fact, modern glass is of furnace from that now in use. But 
more dense, i.e. specifically heavier, such an entire change of system is 
than old glass. hardly to be expected, when we recol- 

2 Before the ancient material is repro- lect how small a quantity of glass, 
duced, the manufacturer must have compared with what is annually manu- 
recourse to the ancient mode of pre- factured, is consumed by the glass- 
paring the materials and colours of the painters. 


and owing to the highly homogeneous texture of modern glass, 
which renders it peculiarly unfit for minute mosaics, the little 
bits of red and blue in this window run together, and form 
a violet when seen from a little distance. As, however, it may 
be objected that this window is by no means a favourable 
specimen of modern craft, I will refer to another work put 
up about the same time as the last, in Ely Cathedral (both 
windows bear date 1847), by M. Gerente, the French glass- 
painter before mentioned. In this window also the design and 
execution of an Early English Medallion window have been 
closely imitated, and with better success. In particular, the 
window is brilliant, the glass not having been much dulled with 
the Enamel colour, and the blue used in it very closely resembles 
the ancient in its hue ; nevertheless, the uniform depth of the 
coloured glass, and more especially the thin and flimsy appear- 
ance of the window, are fatal to its correctness as an imitative 
work. Affecting to be an Early English Picture window, it 
wholly Avants the essential characteristic of an Early English 
Picture window — the grandeur arising from the use of solid, 
deep, and vivid colouring. 1 At Chester Cathedral, two modern 
Picture windows have lately been put up ; the one is in imitation 
of Early Decorated, the other of Perpendicular glass ; but not- 
withstanding the great difference of their detail, both windows 
are immediately perceived to be of the same date, because glass 
alike in texture has been used in the formation of each. 

It is far more easy, however, to notice these defects, than 
to suggest the means by which similar failures may be avoided ; 
and yet it is necessary that attention should be directed to the 
subject, in order that we may be able to impart to Gothic glass- 
paintings that harmony with Gothic architecture which is con- 
sidered an essential requisite in them. 

Harmony, as we have seen, is dependent partly on the nature 
and execution of the design, partly and principally on the tone 
of the colouring. On the former of these sources of harmony 

1 The most favourable place for view- interior of the cathedral, however, the 

ing this window from is in the church- colours appear weak and feeble, as 

yard, through one of the windows of stated in the text, owing to the dila- 

the north transept, whence the colours tion of the pupil which the darkness of 

appear sufficiently deej3 and strong ; the the place occasions. Of course it fol- 

eye being unable to take in more than lows, that, if at any time the cathedral 

a small portion of the rays that pass should be rendered darker by the intro- 

through the glass, owing to the con- ductiou of more painted windows, the 

traction of the pupil caused by the colours of M. Gerente's window will 

glare of the outdoor light. From the appear proportionably lighter. 



I shall not make many observations, as it is that which is most 
within the reach of the modern artist, and in which he may, 
without much difficulty, succeed, though his ancient predecessor 
has failed. The succeeding part of this paper will therefore 
be principally directed to a consideration of the best means of 
obtaining harmony from the second of these sources. 

The chief difficulty lies in devising some method by which, in 
a Picture glass-painting (for the object may be more easily 
accomplished in a white pattern), an effect of colour may be 
produced that will harmonize with the more gloomy Gothic 
edifices, such as those of the Early English style. " By colouring," 
says Sir Joshua Reynolds, "the first effect of the picture is pro- 
duced." 1 This remark applies with the utmost force to a glass- 
painting, of which the colouring is so important a feature that 
everything else may be considered subordinate to it. We have 
already seen that the colouring which best accords with the 
sombre character of Gothic architecture is of a cold tone, and 
that tints the most solid and intense harmonize best with the 
darkness of an Early English interior. Yet of the glass which 
the modern glass-painter must use, one or two sorts only can be 
said to approximate to the effect of Early English glass in their 
cold grave hue and substantial appearance. Most of the modern 
colours, besides being raw, have a warm, 2 rather than a cold 
tone. This is particularly the case with the blue glass. Still I 
am inclined to think that glass.-paintings might be made to 
harmonize with Gothic buildings, even with those of the Early 
English style, in a greater degree than has hitherto been the 
case, by the exercise of some care and judgment in making the 
design, arranging its colours, and executing the work. 

The principle that regulates the colouring of an Early 
English window, by winch all nice and prettily graduated tints 
are excluded, and distinct uniform and forcible colours only are 
used, is of itself, by reason of its simplicity, an element of 
grandeur, which ought to be adopted in a work that aims at 
solemnity of effect. 3 Therefore, in a modern window designed 
for an Early English building, it would seem preferable to use 

1 Fourth Discourse. warmth of colour would, however, have 

2 The warm tone of the colouring of been unobjectionable, had the painting 
the great south window of the transept been put in a dark building in the 
of Westminster Abbey is a defect, Italian or Palladian style, as St. Paul's 
though, I fear, one that could not by Cathedral. 

any possibility have been avoided in a 3 Reynolds's Fourth Discourse, 
work intended for such a place. The 


stiff-coloured or white backgrounds for the pictures, than land- 
scape backgrounds ; for the latter could only be adequately- 
represented by using graduated tints, which would not only 
destroy the simplicity of the colouring, but necessarily involve 
a diminution of its depth. So the flesh-colour of the figures 
should be deep, and their draperies consist of stiff simple tints. 
But whilst adopting generally the mediaeval principle of colour- 
ing, it will be found necessary to introduce certain modifications 
in the use and arrangement of individual colours, and some 
novelties in the design and execution of the picture, in order to 
compensate as much as possible for the thinness and weakness 
of modern glass, and produce an effect of depth, as well as 

The principal innovations that seem desirable are, the adop- 
tion of a broader and less mosaic system of colouring, the use 
of a greater proportion of white glass, and the employment of 
shadows far more effective and powerful than are usually met 
with in an Early English Picture window. 1 These (and others 
of hardly less importance might be mentioned, such as the 
correct drawing of the human figure and scientific treatment of 
drapery) may be advocated as improvements on the ancient 
system ; 2 but their adoption, as a means of producing the 
desired effect, is rendered necessary by the peculiar texture of 
modern glass. Any one who has paid attention to the subject 
must have perceived that modern glass diffuses or spreads its 
hue laterally, in a much greater degree than the glass of the 
thirteenth century ; and that the confusion of tint arising from 
this circumstance increases in proportion to the minuteness and 
pellucidness of the pieces employed. We have seen the ill effect 
of attempting to correct this diffusion of colour at the expense 
of the transparency of the glass : the most obvious expedient is 
to avoid, as much as possible, the use of such minute mosaics, 
and to design the window accordingly. The employment of 
white glass in much greater quantity than is seen in ancient 
Early English Picture windows is necessary, in order to increase 

1 Even were it possible to obtain notions, such as the necessity of keeping 
glass exactly like that of the thirteenth glass-painting purposely in an unde- 
and fourteenth centuries, I should still veloped state, "lest it should cease to 
advocate the use of powerful shadows. be the handmaid of Gothic architec- 

2 The propriety of imitating the de- ture," will probably be exploded in due 
fective drawing of the mediaeval artists course of time, when the subject is 
is, I believe, now pretty generally de- better understood. 

nied by its former advocates. Other 

H 2 


by contrast the apparent depth of the modern coloured glass ; 
which, unlike the glass of the thirteenth century, is not solid 
enough to withstand the weakening effect on individual tints 
caused by placing a number of strong colours in juxtaposition, 
unrelieved with white glass. 1 If white glass of a sufficiently 
green and cold tone is used for this purpose, the grandeur and 
solemnity of the window is rather increased than diminished by 
its introduction. In proof, I may refer to the Jesse which 
occupies the south end of the transept of Stafford Church; 
a work scarcely inferior to an original example in depth of 
effect, though a greater proportion of white glass is used in it 
than would appear in an ancient Early English Jesse, from 
which its design is borrowed. 2 

Powerful stipple shadows 3 in the figures and draperies will 
materially check the tendency of modern glass to diffuse its tint, 
without destroying its transparency ; and will also serve to 
increase the depth and richness of the colouring, and the 
general solidity and grandeur of the design. Such shadows, 
when combined with brilliant lights, and confined within due 
limits of superficial extent, as we find them in Cincpiecento 
glass-paintings, can never, however strong, produce a dull effect; 
for the brilliancy of the material is shown in the sparkling lights, 
and is enhanced by the darkness of the shadows. They also 
promote harmony of effect, and serve to correct the natural 
spottiness of a Picture glass-painting, by preventing too violent 
transitions from one colour to another. They also materially 
conduce to the distinctness of the design, by separating the 
various objects from each other, and cutting them out from the 
ground of the picture. It is obvious that the mere use of strong 
contrasts of light and shade, without diminution of the depth of 

1 The window of the south transept, painting has been attempted), that, 

Westminster Abbey, has white glass had Mr. Nixon done nothing else, it 

enough to have given value to the other would have been sufficient to entitle 

colours, had not its tint been too much him to the respect of those who desire 

subdued by the enamel brown shading, to see the true revival of a neglected 

Thi3, and the want of more powerful and underi-ated branch of art. I will 

shadows and clear lights, especially in venture to say that this window will 

the larger subjects, seem to be the chief be appreciated in proportion as glass - 

technical defects of the window as a painting becomes better understood, 

glass-painting. Yet such is the supe- a The window was painted by 'Ward 

riority of this work over its contempo- and Nixon. 

raxies, both here and abroad (and it 3 The superiority of stipple to smear 

should be recollected that it is the first shadows is shown in the ' Hints on 

English work in which any attempt to Glass-painting,' pp. 249, 28ti. 
carry out a legitimate system of glass- 


the local colours, cannot detract from the simplicity of the 
design ; and that strong outlines may be united with strong 
shadows whenever they may be necessary in order to make the 
execution of the figures harmonize with that of the mere pattern- 
work. Yet the employment of strong shadows in any Picture 
glass-painting, and particularly in one designed alter an Early 
English model, has been so pertinaciously objected to, that it 
seems worth while to examine the grounds of the objection. 
The most plausible ground of defence for the flatness of medi- 
eval Picture glass-paintings is founded on the opinion that, as 
these works formed part of that system of surface decoration 
which covered the walls and sculpture with flat patches of bur- 
nished gold and gaudy colours, they ought to be flat, in order to 
harmonize with the flatness of the pictures on the wall : the 
flatness of the latter being maintained on the ground that it 
was contrary to the principles of mediaeval art to practise ocular 
deception. The proof of this last assertion, however, lies on 
those who make it : and when we perceive that a mediaeval 
mural picture, unlike a mural diaper pattern, is not wholly 
devoid of shadow, and that linear perspective is not unfre- 
quently attempted in it, the inference is that the flatness of the 
picture has its origin rather in an imperfect and undeveloped 
state of the art of representation, than in any deliberate inten- 
tion : an inference which is strengthened by the fact, that this 
flatness often appears to vary in degree with the skill of the 
artist as shown in his treatment of the subject in other respects. 
Assuming, however, the correctness of the opinion above alluded 
to, it affords an additional reason for discarding flatness from 
modern Picture glass-paintings. For the mediaeval system 
of surface decoration no longer existing, a detached part of it 
(like the unconnected portions of any other whole when deprived 
of their proper accompaniments) can hardly be expected to 
please. Flat Picture glass-paintings, disjoined from the surface 
decorations of which they are supposed to have formed a part, 
would stand alone without anything to countenance and har- 
monize with them. Even if this were not the case, it would be 
unreasonable to execute modern Picture glass-paintings, which 
must depend on their own unsupported merits, as if they were to 
form parts of a whole which has no existence. Flat Picture 
glass-paintings, according to the opinion above noticed, will 
be out of place except in buildings where the walls are stiffly 
illuminated after the mediaeval fashion. Therefore, if we wish 
to introduce them, we must, in order to be consistent, also 
illuminate the walls. But modern taste will probably always 


prevent this practice, which, though it might have harmonized 
with the gaudy and glittering costumes of our mediaeval an- 
cestors, would present too glaring and violent a contrast to the 
more sober and more elegant colours now in use. 

Another objection which has been urged against the use of 
strong shadows in a Picture glass-painting, from a fear that they 
might diminish the brilliancy of the work, has already been 
answered ; a third objection to apparent roundness being given 
to objects in a Picture glass-painting, because calculated to 
convey an idea of their substantiality, contrary to our perception 
of the fact that the light actually does pass through them, seems 
unworthy of serious notice, for it strikes at the root of all imita- 
tion whatever. On the other hand, it is difficult to reconcile the 
flatness of mediaeval Picture glass-paintings with the relief of the 
contemporary sculpture, or, perhaps, with any sound principle 
of taste. Indeed, if it be proper that the conditions of glass- 
painting should be reduced below the conditions of sculpture, 
and that its Pictorial productions should continue to be, like the 
mediaeval examples, little else than flat mosaics, it would always 
be better to choose for the subject of a glass-painting a mere 
pattern, rather than a picture ; because a more exact balance 
and arrangement of colour can be preserved in a mosaic con- 
sisting of a stiff formal pattern, than in one composed, as a 
picture, of figures and draperies. 

It will be observed that the foregoing suggestions and recom- 
mendations, however inconsistent with the practice of making 
servile copies of ancient Picture glass-paintings, are in no wise 
opposed to the use of designs founded on their principle. The 
idea suggested by an Early English Medallion window might 
be well carried out by treating the medallions strictly as 
pictures, having stiff-coloured or white grounds. No attempt 
should be made, as in the original, to represent a landscape 
background to the picture, either by merely introducing con- 
ventional objects, according to the practice of the mediaeval 
artists, or by means of aerial perspective, in conformity with 
the truer principles of modern art : for the first course would 
involve an absurdity unworthy of perpetuation, and the light- 
tinted effect produced by the latter would be opposed to the stiff 
and solemn colouring of the rest of the window. Each medallion 
should contain simply a group of figures, relieved with bold 
shadows, and contrasted in colour to the ground of the panel. 
The character and arrangement of the figures and draperies 
might be borrowed, not copied, from the sculpture of the thir- 
teenth, century, which abounds in noble and graceful draped 


forms, that, without any loss of simplicity, might be perfected 
by the refinement of modern art. And the importance of the 
pictures should be fully maintained by making the surrounding- 
ornamental details subordinate to them in all respects. The 
Early English Figure and Canopy window, and especially the 
Jesse window, might with similar modifications be made to har- 
monize with the architecture more completely than the ancient 
examples. If the former type should be followed, the canopy, 
which is as much an integral part of the picture as the figure, 
should be represented as an object covering the figure, and as 
a niche into which the figure casts a shade. A small amount 
of shadow might suffice, but enough should be used to insu- 
late the figure as completely as this is done in the sculpture. 
No Early English designs are, however, more worthy of study, 
certainly none are so well suited to the nature of modern glass 
as white Pattern windows. The cold tone and substantial 
appearance of these windows have been well imitated in 
" Powell's Pressed Glass," in the transept windows of the new 
church at Hackney, 1 and more especially in the east window of 
the south aisle of Stafford Church, the work of Ward and 
Nixon. Pictures (if inserted into these windows) would have 
a rich effect, owing to the contrast which the white of the 
pattern would present to their colouring. 

In like manner, many of the ancient Decorated designs might 
suggest useful hints to the modern glass-painter. The white 
Pattern windows could be imitated in the modern material 
as successfully as the Early English white patterns. The usual 
design of the ancient Figure and Canopy window would, how- 
ever, if adopted, require considerable modification to render 
it satisfactory, owing to the great disproportion which the 
architectural accessories bear to the figure, by which the latter, 
instead of being the principal object in the picture, is often 
rendered the most insignificant. It would be better, in the case 
of large single figures, to follow another ancient arrangement, 
and place them on a background of ornamented quarries. In 
the choir of St. Sebald's Church, Nuremberg, is a late Decorated 
canopy, representing the interior of an apse, with figures in it, 
which extends quite across a four-lighted window. Such a 
canopy, if properly treated, might be rendered highly conducive 
to the general effect of the picture. Whether its strong cast of 
colour might not prove too heavy for a mullioned window, is a 
question that cannot be easily determined without trying the 

1 The design of these windows is not alluded to. 


experiment. It certainly would not be heavier in effect than 
many ancient designs. I consider strong Stipple Shadows, 
good drawing, and a large quantity of white glass of a cold 
tone, indispensable to the full effect of a picture founded on the 
ancient Decorated model. The artist would, I think, do well to 
avoid in these works a too liberal use of the yellow stain, on 
account of its tendency to impart a yellowness to the sur- 
rounding white glass. Many modern windows in which much 
stain is used, especially those composed of the yellow-tinted 
"Cathedral Glass," appear at a little distance as if they were 
wholly yellow. It should be borne in mind that, the stained 
yellow being rarely, like another colour, surrounded with an 
outline of considerable strength, there is little to counteract its 
diffusive tendency. 

It is unnecessary to make any lengthened observations on the 
subject of Picture windows, designed for Perpendicular and 
Classical edifices. The artist Mould not fail to borrow, as 
suitable to the nature of modern glass, the breadth and arrange- 
ment of colour which is equally displayed in the works both of 
the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries; whilst a careful study 
of the Cinquecento style would teach him to avoid, by means of 
strong transparent shadows, the sj)ottiness and indistinctness 
of Perpendicular Picture glass-paintings, and to produce the 
most powerful and striking effects with the most flimsy mate- 
rials. It would be easy, without, of course, using Cinquecento 
forms, to adopt the Cinquecento improvements on Gothic 
designs, so as to increase the general effect of the picture by 
means of its architectural details. A gayer tone of colouring 
might easily be imparted to glass-paintings intended for Clas- 
sical buildings ; and in these works, if not in the glass-paintings 
intended for the later Perpendicular architecture, the use of 
landscape backgrounds, exhibiting such graduated shades of 
colour as the modern improvements on the Mosaic system can 
effect, would not be out of character, except in those cases 
where, owing to the darkness of the situation, or other circum- 
stances, a more simple style of colouring would be requisite, and 
which might involve the use of plain backgrounds to the 
pictures. In like manner a more severe character could be 
imparted to the glass-painting in other respects, according to the 
severity of the architecture. Indeed, severity of style, — that 
is, the simplicity which suggests no defect, as in Greek art, — is 
not only attainable in a glass-painting, but seems most in 
accordance with the principles of the art. The ornamented 
quarry patterns would be as appropriate now as they ever were 



for Perpendicular buildings, and it would be easy to enrich them 
when necessaiy, by the introduction of small coloured pictures, 
or knots of foliage : whilst " Hound glass," in panes of at least 
six inches diameter, would be found a cheap, appropriate, and 
effective material for white Pattern windows, intended for Clas- 
sical edifices. 1 

The foregoing observations will not have been useless should 
they merely have the effect of directing attention to a point in 
general too little regarded in the selection of a painted window 
— its fitness for the place it is intended to occupy. Of course 
the mode of execution must depend on the artistic skill of the 
painter. 2 We cannot expect any general improvement in glass- 
painting to take place so long as considerable patronage is 
bestowed on unworthy objects ; so long as great countenance 
is given to works the design and execution of which w r ould not 
be tolerated in any other branch of art. 

My best thanks are due to the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln 
for granting me free access to the glass in their cathedral, and 
other assistance which materially facilitated my researches. 

1 The windows of Michael Angelo's 
noble design for the church of St. John 
Baptist, at Florence, are represented as 
glazed with Round glass. See Jacob de 
Rubeis, ' Insiguiurn Romse Templo- 

rum,' plate 48. 

2 I presume that the Commissioners 
on the Fine Arts are not responsible for 
the execution of the painted windows of 
the House of Lords. 



From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at 
Salisbury, 1849. 

ALISBURY CATHEDRAL, like many of our 
ecclesiastical edifices, affords a far better oppor- 
tunity of studying ancient painted glass in detail, 
and learning the conventionalities of design, which 
are too often supposed to be the sole test of style, 
than of contemplating it in mass, and accustom- 
ing the eye to those other indications of date 
which are to be found in its colour and general 
appearance. The inquirer who proceeds to Salisbury must there- 
fore be content for the most part with an examination of little 
else than fragments, and to consume much time in the laborious 
process of unravelling patchwork made up of glass of different 
designs and different dates. 

The most woful destruction of the painted glass appears to 
have taken place during Mr. Wyatt's " restoration " of the cathe- 
dral ; when, in the words of my informant, " whole cartloads of 
glass, lead, and other rubbish were removed from the nave and 
transepts, and shot into the town-ditch, then in course of being 
filled up ; whilst a good deal of similar rubbish was used to level 
the ground near the chapter-house." 1 The surviving frag- 

1 The latter part of this statement 
was confirmed by Mr. William Ranger, 
glazier to the cathedral, in the employ 
of iti'. Fisher, the clerk of the works, 
— who informed me that he possessed 
the head of a figure which some years 
ago he saw dug up near the chapter- 
house, along with other fragments of 
painted glass, by some workmen em- 
ployed in making holes for some 
scaffold-poles. Mr. Ranger, who, since 
1819, has been employed in repairing 
the cathedral windows, assisted in 

placing the greater part of the painted 
glass in its present situation. The in- 
formation I have obtained from him has 
therefore been particularly valuable, 
since it has enabled me to state posi- 
tively that such and such glass was 
brought from the chapter-house, or 
from elsewhere. I may add, that in 
every instance I found his information 
was corroborated by the character of 
the glass. I take this opportunity of 
acknowledging also the kind assistance 
1 have derived from Mr. Fisher, and 



raents, 1 it seems, were suffered to retain their original position 
in the building until about thirty years ago, when the majority 
were collected together as they now appear, — an act which, 
however praiseworthy in itself, as tending perhaps to preserve 
the glass from utter destruction, has greatly increased the 
difficulty of analysing the fragments, and describing them in- 

With a view to render this paper as illustrative as possible of 
the different styles of painted glass, I propose to notice first the 
oldest remains in Salisbury, viz. the original glass of the cathe- 
dral and chapter-house ; and then, successively, the Decorated 
remains in St. Thomas's Church, Salisbury, and the Perpen- 
dicular glass in the hall of John Halle ; concluding with some 
remarks on the later and modern glass in the cathedral. 

Mr. Osmond, a gentleman in Mr. 
Fisher's office, in the course of my in- 

1 At the time of the great destruction 
of the Salisbury glass, some fragments 
were preserved by being transferred to 
the windows of Grately Church, Hants. 
I am under a deep obligation to the 
Rev. C. Dodson and W. Gale, Esq., the 
incumbent and churchwarden of Grate- 
ley, for having, during the recent re- 
pairs of their church, forwarded these 
remains for my inspection. They con- 
sist principally of a few varieties of or- 
namental borders : some ornamental 
scroll-work, similar in character to that 
of the "Jesse" in the west window of 
Salisbury Cathedral ; a small fragment 
of a medallion, representing the Annun- 
ciation (of this, only a portion of the 
angel remains, with a scroll on his head, 
inscribed gabriei., in Lombardic cha- 
racters) ; and a very fine circular medal- 
lion, set in a square of ornamental work, 
representing the martyrdom of St. 
Stephen. The saint, habited as a 
deacon, is in the act of falling, with his 
hands in an attitude of prayer, dead to 
the ground. A man immediately be- 
hind appeal's to communicate, with an 
air of savage exultation, the fatal event 
to another miscreant, who is approach- 
ing (as I think is indicated by the frag- 
ments that remain of this figure) with 
his mantle filled with stones, and seems 
disappointed at being too late. Both 
men have decidedly Jewish physiogno- 

mies. The group is delineated with 
great spirit. Below is the following 
inscription, in Lombardic characters, 


The saint's head is painted on a piece of 
light ruby glass. This mode of indi- 
cating the effect of wounds is not un- 
usual. There is an instance of it in a 
medallion of the thirteenth century, at 
West Horsley Church, Surrey, repre- 
senting the angel rescuing St. Catherine 
from the punishment of the wheel. 
The heads of two of the executioners, 
who seem to have been struck down by 
the angel, are painted on red glass. 
The head of St. Stephen in a window 
of Sefonds Church, dated 1524, appears 
from the description, and an uncoloured 
engraving of it given in M. Arnaud's 
' Voyage archeologique et pittoresque 
dans le De'partement de l'Aube et dans 
l'ancien Diocese de Troyes,' to be 
painted on a piece of white glass 
streaked with ruby. The description 
is as follows : " Celui de ces vitraux 
que nous avons fait dessiner repre'sente 
le martyre de Saint Etienne. On voit 
ce saint vetu en diacre, la tete inonde'e 
du sang qui jaillit de ses blessures " 
(p. 228). 

All these fragments at Grateley are 
of the same date as the Jesse in the 
west window of Salisbury Cathedral ; 
from which it may be inferred that they 
belonged to the cathedral, not to the 


The original glass of the cathedral and chapter-house — by 
which I mean that which is coeval with these buildings — is valu- 
able as belonging to different periods of the Early English style ; 
the oldest specimen being perhaps as early as 1240, and the 
most recent not earlier than perhaps 1270 or 1280. Part of this 
glass belonged to the cathedral and part to the chapter-house. 
It is now all mixed together in the cathedral windows ; but I 
have succeeded in distinguishing the different portions, and hope 
that I may be equally successful in enabling others to distinguish 

Of these ancient remains only two specimens retain their 
original situation, viz. a part of the glazing of the second and 
fourth transept, counting from the north of the great north tran- 
sept. The rest are collected in the west triplet of the nave ; in 
the west window of each aisle of the nave ; in the east window 
of each aisle of the choir ; in the lower south triplet of the small 
south transept ; and in the two centre lights of the upper tier of 
the south windows of the great south transept. A few other 
fragments are preserved in the glazier's room attached to the 
cathedral. The subjects consist chiefly of ornamental patterns ; 
but these are the remains of a " Stem of Jesse," as w ell as some 
medallion pictures, borders, and shields of arms. 

The remains of the Stem of Jesse are contained in the lower 
part and sides of the central light of the northern triplet of the 
nave. 1 They were removed from a window of the great north. 
transept, in which they had been inserted in the course of 
repairs. Another portion, no longer existing, is represented in 
the 79th plate of Carter's ' Ancient Architecture,' fig. Q, and is 
there called " ancient glazing in the nave ;" from which I infer 
that it was in one of the aisle windows of the nave, which, not 
improbably, was the original situation of the Jesse. The Jesse 
appears, from the existing fragments and from the plate in 
Carter, to have been designed according to the usual type of the 
period ; and to have consisted of a vine, whose ramifications 
formed a central series of ovals containing representations of our 
Lord and His principal ancestors, and supported on offshoots 
from the ovals, the figures of prophets, patriarchs, and, other 

1 The window, previously to the pre- Cathedral,' and in a view of the west 

sent glass being placed in it, was filled end of the cathedral in Dodsworth's 

with a bad ornamental pattern, the gift 'History of Salisbury.' Some small 

of the Rev. Benson Earle. Of this the pieces of the glass are worked into the 

general outline is preserved in the 5th west triplet and other windows of the 

plate of Britton"s ' History of Salisbury cathedral. 


Philip DelaiuoiLe. del . from a, dr awing by C Winston 


ascent "Bronks 


Two only of the ovals remain. They are on each side of the 
large Cinquecento picture of a bishop enthroned, which is so 
conspicuous an object in the lower half of the central light, and 
nearly in a line with the head of this figure. In the southern 
oval is represented our Saviour 1 enthroned, holding a book in 
one hand, the other being raised in benediction. The head is 
that of a middle-aged person ; it possesses much of the Byzantine 
character, and is surrounded with a cruciferous aureole. The 
stigmata are not shown in the hands and feet. 

In the northern oval is represented a female seated, and in 
an attitude of adoration. I presume the figure is intended for 
the Blessed Virgin. 

The most perfect remains of that part of the composition which 
constitutes the space outside the ovals are on the south side 
of the central light, near the bottom. They consist of foliaged 
scrolls, which support an unnimbed full-length figure holding a 
blank label — the usual personification of a prophet — and an 
angel. Between these figures is a small bust, which issues from 
the termination of one of the foliaged scrolls, and may be sup- 
posed to represent a prophet or patriarch. Similar fragments of 
foliaged scroll-work and figures may be seen higher up, on the 
south side of the light ; and higher still, in a line with the large 
circle almost at the top of the light, are two demi-attendant 
figures, which, from their size and altitude, I conclude originally 
flanked the highest oval of the Jesse. A good deal of the border 
originally belonging to the light that contained the Jesse is used 
as a border to the central light of the triplet. A portion of this 
border is given in the first plate that accompanies this paper : 
see fig. 2. 2 

1 I presume that this is correct. In sitting on a throne, without the stig- 

the "Jesse" in the east window of mata, is given in No. 24 of the ' Archco- 

Westwell Church, Kent, the topmost logical Journal,' p. 412. Other examples 

object is the Holy Dove; the second, maybe seen in the plates to the paper 

a similar representation to that in the on St. Ethelwold's Benedictional, in the 

text, of one of the Persons of the Holy 24th volume of the ' Archscologia,' &c. 

Trinity, and which likewise is without The centre figure of qur Saviour in the 

the stigmata. The third subject is the north rose of Lincoln Cathedral is un- 

Virgin Mary, unaccompanied by the fortunately so mutilated that it is im- 

Divine Infant. A distinction is perhaps possible to say whether or not it had 

taken between the representation of our the stigmata. Had the figure been 

Saviour as Judge of the world, — when perfect, it would have thrown light on 

He is, I believe, invariably represented the subject. See an account of this 

with the stigmata, in allusion perhaps window in the Lincoln volume of the 

to Zech. xii. 10, Rev. i. 7, — and when Proceedings of the Archaeological Iusti- 

He is rep resented either as sitting in tute. 

His kingdom, or else in His human 2 The illustrations which originally 

capacity. An instance of our Saviour accompanied this memoir are mentioned 


The whole Jesse is on a ruby ground, the colour of which is 
extremely rich and intense ; the main stem is white, and formed 
of short lengths of foliage, each terminating in a trefoil or 
cinquefoil, according to the ordinary convention of the thirteenth 
century. The offshoots are of the same character as the parent 
stem ; but some of the leaves at the termination of the scrolls 
are of different colours. Small bunches of grapes are occasion- 
ally introduced. The attendant figures are tall and slim ; the 
heads have a certain classical character, and bear considerable 
resemblance to the specimen given in the ' Hints on Glass-paint- 
ing,' plate 34, fig. 2 ; which is copied from a contemporary Jesse 
in Westwell Church, Kent. 

All the draperies are full of small folds, expressed by outlines 
so strong and black as almost to render the use of broader and 
softer shadows unnecessary. The colouring of every part of 
the design is rich, deep, and vivid. The blue, which is of the 
peculiar grey though rich hue common at this period, 1 and 
the flesh-colour, are of strong tint. The white glass is of a 
greenish-blue hue ; it is but little affected by the atmosphere, 
and, on the whole, is not quite so deep as the rather later white 
glass taken from the chapter-house, and which is now in the 
west triplet. The date of the Jesse is certainly in the first half 
of the thirteenth century ; it may be placed as early as 1240. 

Of the medallion pictures to which I have alluded, two appear, 
from many particulars, to be coeval with the Jesse. They are 
inserted beneath the two ovals, in a line nearly with the feet of 
the Cinquecento bishop. The south medallion represents the 

in a note to this passage, as a first Early English blue glass that I have 
attempt with the " anastatic process," hitherto met with, is in the window 
and a wish is expressed that they had which the late M. Gerente first put up 
been less rough. The remarks there in Ely Cathedral. In his second win- 
made on them do not apply to the dow he is not more successful than his 
illustrations accompanying the memoir English contemporaries ; the same re- 
in the present volume, which are new mark equally applies to all his brother's 
lithographs. work that I have seen. I fear that our 
1 I am persuaded that the peculiar glass-works are on too extended a scale 
tint of the early English blue pot-metal to render it worth their proprietors' 
glass, noticed in the text, principally while to make glass fit for glass-paint- 
arises from the green hue of the white ing purposes, and that no advance in 
glass that forms its base. It will be this respect is to be expected till the 
found that some kinds of modern blue smaller men take the matter up. An 
glass may be given the precise tint of inquiry into the nature of the colouring 
the old, by placing a piece of early material of ancient blue glass has long 
English white glass behind them. The engaged my attention; but my re- 
nearest approach to the colour — cer- searches are still incomplete, 
tainly not to the depth of effect — of 


Angel appearing to Zacharias in the Temple ; the north, the 
Adoration of the Magi. These medallions were brought from 
the same window as the remains of the Jesse. Two other 
medallions of the thirteenth century are inserted in the west 
triplet ; but they seem to be French, and possibly were brought 
from Normandy with some of the later pictures now used to fill 
up the lights. One is the small circular panel, containing two 
figures, that is placed in the centre light, a little above the oval 
in which is represented the Blessed Virgin. It appears to be of 
the last half of the thirteenth century. The other is a circle 
of larger size inserted near the top of the northern light of the 
triplet. There is nothing in any of these medallions that calls 
for particular notice. The figures are according to the style of 
the period, and the groups are, as usual, plain and distinct, 
owing to their simple composition and the manner in which the 
individual figures are cut out and insulated by the surrounding 
coloured ground of the panel. Modern glass-painters in their 
imitations of Early English medallions are too apt to neglect 
the simplicity of the ancient arrangement, and to make their 
own groups confused and indistinct. It must, however, be ad- 
mitted that there are " authorities " in their favour, as in the 
case of medallions representing the Ascension or the Day of 
Pentecost, in which the complication of the group and want 
of relief through the absence of broad shadows cause indistinct- 
ness, and create a doubt whether the ancient medallions in 
which distinctness is observable were designed with a view to 
that quality, or merely in accordance with the prevailing taste 
for simple compositions, which is equally exemplified in illumi- 
nations and drawings intended for the closest inspection. 

The rest of the medallion pictures are of a somewhat later 
date than the Jesse. They were all removed from the windows 
of the chapter-house, and are placed in the west triplet of the 
nave and in the west windows of the nave aisles. From their 
style of execution I conclude that they are not earlier than 
1270. The principal subject is a large circle almost at the top 
of the centre light of the west triplet, which contains two figures, 
a bishop and a king (Eclw. Confessor ?), under an archway. The 
panel was removed from the middle of the large octofoil of one 
of the windows of the chapter-house. On comparing this circle 
with the Jesse and the two contemporary medallions, some 
remarkable differences in the drawing of the figures and texture 
of the glass will appear. In particular, I may mention the cha- 
racter of the eyes and eyebrows of the figures. Their heads 


somewhat resemble the example given in the ' Hints on Glass- 
painting,' plate 37, fig. 1. The flesh-colour is much lighter 
than that used in the Jesse, as is also the blue ground of the 
plane, though, this has a rich appearance. 

The next remains in point of importance are two large 
elongated quatrefoil panels, each containing an ecclesiastical 
figure under an archway, which are inserted in each side of the 
centre light of the triplet, immediately below a Cinquecento 
representation of the Crucifixion, which forms (reckoning from 
the top) the third principal object in the centre of the window. 
These quatrefoil s were removed from the largest spandrils of 
some of the windows of the chapter-house. In drawing, execu- 
tion, and general character, they entirely resemble the large 
circle which has just been described. Another quatrefoil, like 
the last, but containing the figure of a regal person, lies in the 
glazier's room attached to the cathedral. It w r as likewise re- 
moved from the spandril of one of the chapter-house windows. 

The remaining medallions are ten small circles, four of which 
are inserted in the upper part of the lower lights of the west 
windows of the aisles of the nave ; the rest are placed in the 
centre light of the west triplet. These circles were all removed 
from the centres of the quatrefoil of some of the chapter-house 
windows. Each circle contains a demi-figure of an angel issuing 
from a cloud ; and it would seem that these angels originally 
formed part of some subject from the Revelations, or perhaps 
the Last Judgment. Some of the angels point upwards with the 
hand, and use encouraging gestures ; others carry a book in one 
hand. One bears a long napkin (an emblem of our Lord's 
Passion) ; another holds a palm-branch and crown ; a third, a 
book in one hand and a crescent in the other. In character and 
execution they exactly resemble the other subjects taken from 
the chapter-house. 

Six shields of arms in a perfect condition, and a seventh, of 
which but little, if any, of the original glass exists, are placed at 
the bottom of the lights of the west triplet. The panels in 
which they are inserted are made up of fragments, and the 
crowns above the shields are mostly of Perpendicular date. These 
shields were removed from the chapter-house; and it may be 
inferred from the plate in Carter's 'Ancient Architecture,' before 
alluded to, that they were placed — with another coat now lost, 
but which is represented in that plate — in pairs, side by side, in 
the four lower lights of the east window of the chapter-house. 
It is most probable that the shields were arranged in a line just 


beneath the spring of the heads of the lights. They have every 
appearance of being of the same date as the rest of the glass 
from the chapter-house. 

The important aid to be derived from heraldry in seeking a 
date is well known to every antiquary ; I shall therefore per- 
haps be excused if I enter somewhat fully into the question of 
the probable ownership of these arms, though I admit there is 
too much uncertainty as to what other shields (if any) there may 
have been in the chapter-house windows to warrant any confident 
conclusion, from this species of evidence alone, as to the precise 
time of the execution of the arms, and of the glass with which 
they were originally associated. 

The existing arms are : — 1. England; gules, three lions passant 
guardant, or. 2. France ; azure, seme of fleurs-de-lis, or. 3. 
Paly of eight, or and gules, which I do not hesitate to assign to 
Provence ; for though the arras of Provence may be admitted to 
be properly or, four pallets, gules, as they appear on the wall of 
the south aisle of Westminster Abbey, yet this very coat, Paly 
of eight, or and gules, occurs in a window in York Minster, 
associated with others that leave no doubt of its having been 
intended for Provence, and also in the east window of the clear- 
story, Westminster Abbey. 4. Plantagenet Earl of Cornwall ; 
argent, a lion rampant, gules, crowned or, within a bordure sable 
besante. 5. Clare Earl of Gloucester ; or, three chevrons gules. 
And 6. Bigod Earl of Norfolk ; or, a cross gules. There are also 
some pieces of glass very like Bezants inserted in a modern blue 
bordure of the " made-up " shield before mentioned, and which 
consists of a sixteenth-century imp, on a ground of white glass, of 
the same date as that belonging to the chapter-house. These 
Bezants may have formed part of a seventh original shield ; and 
if so, in all probability, it was a second coat of Plantagenet Earl 
of Cornwall, but differenced with a label. Besides these heraldic 
remains, there appears in Carter's plate another coat as before 
mentioned, viz. Warren ; cheeky or and azure. 

The arms of England may safely be assumed to be those of 
Henry III. or Edward I., and Provence was the paternal coat of 
Eleanor, the queen of Henry III., who survived him, and died 
in 1291. The arms of Erance are probably to be referred to St. 
Louis, who married the eldest sister of Queen Eleanor, and died 
in 1270, and whose shield was carved on the wall of the north 
aisle of Westminster Abbey, with his name, " S. Ludovicus Rex 
Francie," inscribed above. The coat of Plantagenet Earl of 
Cornwall was borne by Richard Earl of Cornwall and King of 



the Eomans, the brother of Henry III., who died in 1271. And 
if this coat was repeated, the second must have been that of his 
son Edmund, who succeeded him, and died in 1300. Glare was 
the coat of Gilbert de Clare, Earl of Gloucester, who had married 
a niece of Henry III., viz. a daughter of his half-brother, Guy 
Count of Angouleme, son of Queen Isabella by her second mar- 
riage, and who died in 1295. Warren was that of John Earl of 
Warren and Surrey, who had married a half-sister of Henry III., 
and died in 1304. The remaining coat, or, a cross gules, was 
that of Roger Bigod Earl of Norfolk, whose mother was one of 
the co-heiresses of the Marshals Earls of Pembroke, and who, 
after her death, became Earl Marshal of England in or about 
1245, and died in 1269 or 1270 ; or else that of his nephew 
Roger, who succeeded him in the earldom and the office of 
marshal. Neither of these two noblemen seems to have been 
more nearly allied to the royal family than by a mother and 
sister of the mother of Roger the uncle, having respectively 
married a sister and mother of Henry III. 

Now, judging from these several coats, — and it is by no means 
clear that there were ever any others iu the windows of the 
chapter-house, — they indicate a period of a few years before and 
after the accession of Edward I. in 1272, as that within which it 
is likely this glass was executed, and particularly if there really 
were two coats of the Plantagenets Earls of Cornwall. 

It may possibly be thought that the arms of France may have 
referred to Margaret, the second queen of Edward I., whom he 
married in 1299; but that could hardly be the case, if there 
were two shields with the arms of Plantagenet Earls of Corn- 
wall, as Earl Richard died in 1271 ; and even if there was only 
one shield with those arms, the occurrence of the arms of Pro- 
vence is unfavourable to that supposition. 

The arms or, a cross gules, which I have attributed, and I 
believe correctly, to Roger Bigod Earl of Norfolk, may seem to 
create a difficulty, in consequence of the arms of the Marshals 
Earls of Pembroke — per pale or and vert, a lion rampant gules 
— having been assumed and used on seals for some purposes 
by him after he became Earl Marshal ; and in consequence of 
Vincent, in his ' Errors of Brooke,' p. 340, having stated, in 
contradiction of what Brooke had said of their having been used 
by him for the purposes of the marshalship only, that they were 
used in donations, covenants, &c, and not in matters of the 
marshalship at all. But I would submit that this statement 
of Vincent is evidently too strong ; for though he might have 


known of a seal with those arms being affixed to donations and 
covenants, and he might not have met with any instance of its 
being employed in matters relating to the marshalship, yet he 
could not know that it was not so used at all ; nor does it follow 
that the earl, after he was marshal, used these arms only. In 
fact, these arms, or a cross gules, were carved in stone, and 
painted amongst the series of shields on the wall of the north 
aisle of Westminster Abbey, and inscribed, "Kogerus Bigod 
Comes Norfolcie :" and it is evident that those shields must 
have been executed several years after Earl Eoger became Earl 
Marshal ; and indeed, in all probability, but a few years before 
the date which I have assigned to this glass. Unfortunately 
the seal of Earl Roger the nephew, affixed to the Barons' letter 
to the Pope in 1301, has no arms at all, but only his name and 
title ; but it is apparent, from what is stated by Milles and 
Brooke, that Hugh Bigod, father of the elder Earl Roger, sealed 
sometimes with a lion passant, and sometimes with this cross ; 
and therefore there is no improbability of these arms being those 
of Roger Bigod Earl of Norfolk, though he may have sometimes 
sealed with the arms of marshal. I am aware that this coat was 
borne at a later period by the De Burghs Earls of Ulster ; but 
no one of them appears to have been connected with the royal 
family, or to have had any important place in this country till 
about 1310, when John de Burgh married Elizabeth de Clare, 
daughter of Joan of Acre. On the whole, therefore, it must be 
evident that the heraldry in this glass agrees very satisfactorily 
with the date which I have assigned to it on other grounds. 

The ornamental patterns belonging to the cathedral and to 
the chapter-house next demand our attention. The majority of 
these patterns are of painted glass ; but there are a few which 
may be called Geometrical Patterns, in which the design is ex- 
pressed solely by the lead-work used in the construction of the 
window. The principal remains of the painted patterns, of 
which there are between twenty and thirty varieties, are in the 
west windows of the aisles of the nave, in the east windows of 
the aisles of the choir, in the lowest triplet of the small south 
transept, and in the two upper south lights of the great south 
transept. Some fragments are inserted in the west triplet of the 

These patterns form a series varying in date from that of the 
Jesse to that of the shields of arms in the west triplet. The 
earlier patterns are distinguishable principally by the drawing of 

I 2 


the foliage ; the scrolls of which are in general less twisted, and 
the lobe of the leaf, as compared with the stalk, is somewhat 
smaller than in the later examples. The cross-hatching (making, 
of course, due allowance for patterns designed for more distant 
situations) is in general coarser in the earlier specimens ; whilst 
the glass of the later patterns, in which cross-hatching is used, is 
for the most part of a yellower hue than the glass of the earlier 
patterns. The latest patterns, including all those belonging to 
the chapter-house, want the cross-hatched ground. It is, how- 
ever, impossible to describe exactly the minute differences on 
which the supposition as to the date of the different patterns 
rests ; it is only by the eye that they can be appreciated. 

The patterns, though various in design, exhibit in a greater or 
less degree a principle of composition almost peculiar to Early 
English glass, which seems to have been suggested by the idea 
of forming a rich and complicated pattern by arranging, in strata 
or layers, a number of plane figures or panels, in such a manner 
that the panels composing each layer might overlap and partially 
conceal those beneath. By way of illustrating this principle, I 
have given, in Plate I., fig. 1, a rough sketch of a pattern now 
in the east window of the north aisle of the choir, and which, 
though belonging to the chapter-house, exemplifies the system 
in a more striking manner than perhaps any of the earlier pat- 
terns. It will be seen, on examination, that the pattern is com- 
posed of a number of panels. Each panel has a well-defined 
border ; and the area of the panel is covered with an ornament 
exclusively appropriated to it. The smallest panels merely have 
a narrow edging, and a quatrefoil, or some such ornament, 
within ; the larger panels are ornamented with foliaged scroll- 
works, the ramifications of which do not overstep the limits of 
the border of the panel, nor extend from one panel into another ; 
by which the idea that each panel is a distinct superficies is sus- 
tained. A reference to Plate II., fig. 1, which gives the analysis 
of this pattern, will render the foregoing description more intel- 
ligible. In this plate, A denotes the ground or foundation of 
the window ; B, a quatrefoil, which, with seventeen similar 
panels, some of which are only partially shown in the diagram, 
forms the 1st layer or plane of ornament; C is a circular panel, 
which, with seventeen others, constitutes the 2nd plane of orna- 
ment; D is a nearly square, though really octagonal panel, 1 

The pattern being slightly elongated, in order to fill up a particular opening, 
has rendered this form of panel necessary. 


Philip Delamotte.del from drawings bj C Winston 


inoent Brooks 


which, with three others, forms the 3rd plane of ornament ; E is 
a circular panel, which, with three others, forms the 4th plane 
of ornament ; F is a panel similar to D, which, with two others, 
forms the 5th plane of ornament ; G is a circular panel like E, 
which, with two others, forms the 6th plane of ornament ; H is 
a circular panel, which, with two others, forms the 7th plane of 
ornament ; I is a circular panel, which, with two others, forms 
the 8th plane of ornament; KK are quadrangular and circular 
panels, constituting the 9th plane of ornament ; L indicates the 
border of the window, which, as in the head of the light it cuts 
the rest of the design, must be taken to constitute the 10th plane 
of ornament. 

It is interesting to trace the progressive changes in the style 
of ornamental patterns. Without venturing to assert that the 
system just described was exclusively used at the earliest period, 
I may safely state that, in general, a deviation from it betokens, 
at least in the glass of this country, a lateness of date. 1 Thus, 
in the Five Sisters at York, which are carefully figured in 
Browne's ' History of York Cathedral,' and whose date is pro- 
bably not much earlier than 12(50, although the before-mentioned 
principle is in great measure preserved, it is occasionally violated 
by the ornamental scroll-work breaking from the area of a panel 
through the border, and extending its ramifications beyond it, 
over other parts of the design. The result is to impair, if not 
destroy, the idea of the panel's being an individual superficies, 

1 The principle of ornament by means appropriated to the same chapter-house 

of layers of panels, described in the pattern (furnished in the plate with a 

text, is not fanciful, as might at first be cross - hatched ground) which I have 

supposed. I have long ago remarked sketched in the first plate that accom- 

it in a great variety of examples; and I panies this paper, fig. 1. In the French 

believe it is only once violated, and work many of the foliaged scrolls are 

then in a trifling degree, in the Salis- also erroneously represented in relief, 

bury patterns. The instance to which by thickening, contrary to the fact, one 

I allude is in one of the lights of the of the outlines of the scroll. There are 

south triplet of the small south transept, other minor inaccuracies in these and 

The following plates may be referred other engravings of the Monographie, 

to in illustration of it : Monographie de showing that the plates of this work, 

la Cathedrale de Bourges, plate, etude 11, however magnificent, and useful to those 

in which two of the Salisbury patterns who have seen the glass, are not to be 

are represented; Grisailles D, in which implicitly trusted. See other specimens 

four more are given ; and Grisailles E, of Early English patterns, in Lyson's 

in which six other examples are en- ' Bucks,' plate facing p. 488 ; in the 

graved. Many of the patterns in this ' Inquiry into the Difference of Style 

plate are misrepresented in having observable in ancient Painted Glass,' 

cross-hatched grounds. The border plates 5, 6, 8, and 10; and in Browne's 

sketched in Plate I., fig 2, of the present ' History of York Cathedral,' plates til, 

paper, is in the Grisailles E, fig. 3, mis- G3, 65, 67, and 69. 


and to reduce what primarily was a border to a plane figure, to 
a mere line of decoration, laid as it were upon the ground-work 
of the design. The transition thus becomes easy from the 
Early English to the Decorated ornamental pattern, in which 
the foliaged scroll-work freely spreads itself over the entire area 
of the window, forming a ground-work upon which is laid an 
open interlaced pattern of narrow bands and fillets of various 
geometrical forms. 

It is easy to recognise in the shape of the principal fillets the 
outlines of the panels used in the preceding style, though these, 
having ceased to constitute anything else than mere lines of 
ornament, may happen to be linked together or interlaced. 
By way of illustrating the text, I have given, in Plate III., 1 a 
rough sketch of an early German Decorated pattern (see fig. 1), 
in which the ornamental scroll-work is confined within the limits 
of the demi-quatrefoil panels at the sides of the design, but 
breaks through the borders of the demi-quatrefoil panels at the 
top and bottom of the design ; and also a rough sketch of an 
early Decorated pattern from Chartham church, Kent (see fig. 2), 
iii which the scroll-work freely extends over the area of the 
design. I have also given, in Plate II., the analysis (see fig. 2) 
of a Decorated pattern from Stanford church, Northamptonshire. 
In this diagram, the part opposite A represents the scroll-work 
forming the ground of the pattern ; that opposite B, the inter- 
laced fillets ; and that opposite C, the complete pattern formed 
by laying the interlaced fillets upon the scroll-work. 2 The out- 
line of the Early English quatrefoil panel will be easily recog- 
nised in the form of the beaded quatrefoil fillet. 

The principle of employing several planes of ornament for 
purposes of enrichment pervades mediseval decoration. Its 
application to iron-work has been pointed out by Mr. Pugin. 
and its application to window- tracery by Professor Willis. In 
both these cases, in general, each plane is in design rather com- 
plementary than opposed to that of the plane which precedes 
it in order of ornament ; but instances do occur in architecture 
as well as in painted glass, where the general effect of the com- 
position is produced by the intersection of the designs of different 
planes of ornament, as in the triforium arcade of Beverley 
Minster, figured in the eleventh page of the ' Remarks on 

1 The drawings are made to a scale of - In this particular instance the 

1 \ inch to a foot. The German pattern centre stem of the foliaged scroll-work 

is now in the west window of Cam- is interwoven with the interlaced fillets, 

berwell Church. which is rather unusual. 

>-^k ^ 

**^— ^ ' 

!3S "^o-^° 



IT~"^ 'Ufc ' " ' ^— ^^^^ 

^^^^^^f m ^^ 

^4^^^~ J ^*^fe fc 

— w* v - 


iii ii 



r * ' f ■ i,' i 

Philip Delamocte, del from drawings by C Wins U 

Vincent Brooks . 



Beverley Minster' in the York volume of the Archaeological 
Institute, of which, for facility of reference, I have given a 
tracing in Plate I., fig. 6. We may also recognise the principle 
of intersecting planes of ornament as well in those cases where 
an entire picture in painted glass extends beyond the limits of 
a single light, and is actually severed by the mullions of a 
window, as in those where the subject rather than the picture is 
cut by the mullions, it being composed of separate individual 
parts, which occupy the spaces between the mullions without 
being touched by them. Of the former arrangement there are 
many instances in early Decorated glass at Cologne, where 
some of the figures even are cut by the mullions, and elsewhere ; 
and very numerous instances in later glass. Of the latter, the 
Martyrdom of St. Sebastian in the early Decorated glass of 
Bristol Cathedral, and the very common subject of the Cruci- 
fixion, with the attendant Mary and John, in glass of all dates, 
afford sufficient examples. 

The painted ornamental patterns of the cathedral and 
chapter-house are principally composed of white glass, colour 
being sparingly introduced in the borders and centres of the 
panels. The white glass in some of the later patterns belonging 
to the cathedral is of a dusky yellow hue ; in the majority, 
however, of the patterns it is of a cold though rich sea-green 
hue. To the texture and hue of the glass these patterns owe 
their substantial and solemn appearance, which makes them 
harmonize with the character of the architecture, and with the 
picture glass-paintings that are coeval with them. The local 
colour of the white glass is, except in the dusk of the evening, 
less strikingly apparent on a close than on a distant view. 
Thus the ancient windows, unlike the modern copies in the 
great south transept, are in great measure independent for rich- 
ness of the pattern painted on the glass ; for when the pattern 
itself is lost in distance, the local colour of the material shows 
itself the more distinctly. 

Much of the foliaged scroll-work used in these patterns is of 
great beauty; one of the best specimens is perhaps afforded 
by the pattern in the west window of the north aisle of the 

It is impossible to say whether or not all these pattern 
windows originally had ornamented borders. If the glass 
slightly indicated in the 26th plate of Britton's 'History of 
Salisbury Cathedral ' was then in its original position, it would 


afford ground for supposing that some of the patterns were 
separated from the stone-work only by a plain narrow strip of 
white glass ; the small proportion of borders in existence, as 
compared with the number of the patterns, seems somewhat to 
countenance this supposition. There is but one border, besides 
that of the Jesse, coeval with the older patterns. A sketch of 
it is given in Plate I. fig 2. It is now in the south light of the 
west triplet, mingled with a later border from the chapter- 
house. I think it may be identified with fig. B in Carter's 
plate, which is there designated as a " border from the nave." 
The borders of the patterns in the east windows of the choir 
aisles, and the west windows of the nave aisles, were added at 
the same time that the patterns were removed to these situa- 
tions. The fleurs-de-lis on a blue ground, which are inserted in 
the border of the west window of the south aisle of the nave, 
w T ere taken from another window of the cathedral, and from 
their form do not appear to be earlier than the reign of 
Edward III. That they are not as old as the pattern is placed 
beyond a doubt by the fact of their execution on yellow stained 
glass. 1 

It is clear that ornamented borders were used in the chapter- 
house windows. Three varieties of these borders remain in the 
west triplet, and are sketched in Plate I. figs. 1, 4, and 5, which 
may be identified respectively with figures U, V, and W in 
Carter's plate, and which shows that they belonged to the 
chapter-house. 2 I have appropriated one of these borders to 
the pattern fig. 1 (though it appears from Carter's plate that the 
border belonged to a different pattern), as I found that its addi- 
tion made the pattern 4 feet 1 inch wide — the exact width of 
the chapter-house lower lights. Another pattern from the 
chapter-house, one half of which is inserted in each of the two 
upper south lights of the great south transept, if doubled and 
enlarged with a border of equal width to the last, would also 
exactly fit the lower lights of the chapter-house. This pattern 
resembles one represented in Carter's plate, fig. 5. There is 
one pattern now in the west light of the lowest triplet of the 
small south transept of the same character as the other patterns 

1 In the engraving of this pattern in 2 A border to one of the windows is 

Shaw's 'Encyclopedia of Ornament,' represented in the slight indication of 

the form of the fleur-de-lis is humoured the chapter-house glass given in the 

so as to accord with the date of the 14th plate of Britton's 'History of 

pattern. Salisbury Cathedral.' 


Philip Delamotte, dei from drawings by (. W 

Vincent Brooks . 



from the chapter-bouse, which, if placed in one of the lights of 
that building, would admit only of a narrow strip of glass 
between it and the stone arch ; but this pattern, if it ever 
belonged to the chapter-house, was removed thence long before 
the others, and the difference in the hue of its material favours 
the supposition that it originally belonged to some other place, 
most probably to a window of the cathedral. 

Of the geometrical patterns before alluded to, two specimens, 
retain their original position in two of the east clearstory windows 
of the great north transept. Four other specimens, which were 
removed from the clearstory, are inserted in the lowest part of 
the lights of the south triplet of the small south transept, and 
a few others lie at present in the glazier's room attached to the 

These patterns, as before observed, are entirely composed of 
plain pieces of glass leaded together. The border consists of a 
plain strip of white glass. In design, some resemble a window 
of quarries, having banded edges ; but the majority suggest the 
idea of a number of plain flat members interwoven together. 
Sketches of two examples are given in Plate IV. 1 Most of 
these patterns are enriched by the occasional insertion of small 
plain pieces of coloured glass. The white glass employed in 
these patterns is, in general, of a deeper hue than that used in 
the painted patterns, and gives the windows in consequence the 
appearance of having been made up of refuse fragments. Some 
of the pieces of glass have almost a purple tint ; the greater 
part incline from a light to a deep dusky yellow hue. These 
differences of tint impart great richness and variety to the 
patterns. I think it may be assumed that the geometrical 
patterns are coeval, at all events, with the later painted patterns 
that belong to the cathedral. 

The next glass in order of date consists of a number of rather 
early Decorated quarries (in which the yellow stain is used) that 
are now employed as a border to the centre light of the east 
windows of the north and south aisles of the choir. These 
quarries were removed from a window of the small south 
transept, near the entrance to the vestry, where they were 
placed squarewise. The fleurs-de-lis in the border of the west 
window of the south aisle of the nave have already been 

1 The drawings are made to a scale of l^ inch to a loot. 


It now becomes necessary, for the purpose of continuing to 
investigate the remains of painted glass in order of date, to 
leave the cathedral for St. Thomas's church. The first window 
of the north aisle, counting from the east, . retains in the head 
of both its outer lower lights, and in all its principal tracery- 
lights, fragments of the scroll-work and coloured ground of a 
late Decorated Jesse ; ' the figures have all been destroyed. 
The stem, unlike that of the Jesse in the cathedral, is a flowing 
tendril of white glass from which proceed yellow-stained and 
other-coloured leaves and grapes. The stem is smear-shaded, 
and the ground of the lights is richly diapered. The smaller 
tracery lights are filled with small ornaments in white and 
yellow stained glass. The glass appears to be of the latter part 
of the reign of Edward III. A few small ornaments of the 
same character and date remain in the smaller tracery lights 
of several of the windows of the north aisle. The east window 
of the north aisle has been a figure and canopy window of the 
same date as the last glass. The head of an original canopy, 
composed of white and yellow stained glass, remains in the 
upper part of each of the two outer lower lights. In the tracery 
lights are some mutilated demi-figures, each under a canopy. 
Smear-shading is used in the figures, the drawing of which 
betokens the approach of the Perpendicular style. 

The east window of the south aisle has the remains of canopies 
in its five lower lights, executed in white and yellow stained 
glass. In the two topmost tracery lights is represented the 
Coronation of the Virgin, and in each of the other tracery lights 
is a shield bearing a merchant's mark. This glass seems to be 
of the time of Henry VI. The white glass has a cold greenish 
tint, but not nearly so strong as that of the glass in the windows 
of the north aisle, which, again, is quite of a different hue from 
the white glass of the pattern windows of the cathedral and 

In the vestry adjoining the north aisle of this church is a 
window of three lights, in which are represented, on brackets, 
not under canopies, one of the Persons of the Holy Trinity, 

1 The window itself is of early Per- windows, the form of ornament is 

pendicular character. It is clear that, purely Early English ; but in some of 

in general, the changes of style in archi- the sculpture of that edifice, particu- 

tecture preceded the corresponding larly of the doorway, the Decorated 

changes of style in painted glass. In foliage occurs, 
the glass belonging to the chapter-house 


St. Christopher, and a saint bishop. The lights are glazed 
with ornamental quarries, which form the background to the 
figures, and have borders composed of stained yellow ornaments 
on a red or blue ground. The glass appears to be also of the 
reign of Henry VI. The head of St. Christopher, and the whole 
of the Divine Infant, are painted on a piece of very light pot- 
metal pink glass, an unusual occurrence in English glass of this 
period. The elaborate finish of these figures, and general light- 
ness of the colours used in the window, contrast strongly with 
the more simple and vigorous execution of the figures, and the 
vivid colouring of the Jesse in the cathedral. Stipple-shading 
is employed ; but owing to a timid application of it, the figures 
appear quite flat. 

The Hall of John Halle contains some excellent specimens of 
ornamental glazing and heraldry of the latter part of the reign 
of Henry VI., or commencement of the reign of Edward IV. 
The windows have all been "restored;" but it is easy to dis- 
tinguish the modern additions, which are not extensive, from the 
original glazing. The lights have borders composed of small 
rectangular ornaments (three varieties placed alternately are 
generally used) of white and yellow stained glass, separated by 
small bits of plain blue and red, or blue, green, and pink glass. 
The upper cuspidation of the light is occupied with a lion's head, 
and the next cuspidation on each side with either a rose, a crown, 
a star with wavy rays, or a sun, painted on white and yellow 
stained glass. Ciphers, instead of roses, &c, are used in the 
six cuspidations of one of the lights on the east side of the hall. 
The ground of the lights is composed of ornamented quarries, 
between each row of which is inserted diagonally a scroll in- 
scribed " drede." 1 A panel containing either a coat-of-arms 
or a badge is introduced in the upper part of each of the 
lights on the east side of the hall by being let in to the 
quarry-ground, the pattern of which is cut by the panel. This 
mode of introducing the panels affords another and a very 
common exemplification of the principle of employing different 
planes of ornament for purposes of enrichment. It may be 
said, indeed, that in these windows there are five planes 
of ornament, viz. 1st, the quarry -ground ; 2nd, the scrolls, 
Avhich are supposed to lie on the quarry-ground ; 3rd, the 

1 An attempt is made in Duke's account of the hall to assign a meaning to 
this word. 


jmnels ; 4 th, the shields or badges laid on the panels ; and 
5th, the border of the window which cuts the design. A repre- 
sentation of John Halle himself— of which, however, only the 
legs and ground beneath are original — occupies the centre of 
one of the lights on the west side of the hall. I must refer the 
reader to Duke's account of the Hall of John Halle for a descrip- 
tion of the badges, and for the blazon of the shields. 

The next remains in order of date are the pieces of late Per- 
pendicular and Cinquecento glass used to fill up the west triplet 
of the nave and the centre-light of the east windows of the north 
and south aisles of the choir of the cathedral. Some of this 
glass was brought from France, some from the neighbourhood 
of Exeter. One subject, the arms of Henry VII., now in the 
top of the centre-light of the west triplet, was brought from one 
of the south windows of the south aisle of the nave. Not haviug 
examined these remains so minutely as the other glass, I am 
unable to give an equally detailed account of them. The 
subjects in the west triplet of the nave are, in the south light, 
a figure of St. Peter ; a figure praying ; a figure kneeling before 
a crucifix (St. Francis ?) ; a group of figures ; and a female saint ; 
all which are in the style of the early part of the 16th century. 
The subjects in the centre-light are, a Crucifixion, with Mary 
and John ; the Virgin crowned ; a St. Peter ; a bishop en- 
throned ; all which are of the 16th century, and, as it is said, 
were brought from Normandy. Also the Invention of the Cross 
(the three crosses are each represented as a cross-tau) ; a Cruci- 
fixion, with Mary and John; all which are of the 16th century, 
and are said to have been brought from the neighbourhood of 
Exeter ; and some angels bearing the Instruments of the Passion, 
also of the 16th century, and said to have been brought from 

In the north light the subjects are, a bishop, St. Anthony, 
the Betrayal of Christ, and a St. Catherine ; all which are of 
the 16th century, and are said to be French glass. Unfortu- 
nately I took no memorandum of the subjects in the east 
windows of the choir aisles ; they are of the same character as 
the rest. 

Although these glass-paintings are not very favourable spe- 
cimens of the state of the art in the 16th century, a careful 
examination of them will not be without advantage. They are 
executed on a material more flimsy than that used in the glass- 
paintings in the vestry-room of St. Thomas's church, or in the 


Hall of John Halle ; yet they are far more effective ; and the 
groups of figures, though more complicated, are as distinct, when 
seen at a proper distance, as the simpler groups of the 13th 
century, and convey to the spectator as lively an idea of the 
subject represented. They thus afford a striking proof of the 
skill of the glass-painters of the 16th century, who, principally 
by means of admirable arrangements of colour, and the use of 
powerful though transparent shadows and brilliant lights, dis- 
played the hitherto undeveloped resources of their art. 

The latest old specimen of glass-painting in the cathedral is 
the arms of Bishop Jewell, which is dated 1562, and occupies 
the quatrefoil of the west window of the south aisle of the nave. 
The shield is placed within a wreath : and the whole composi- 
tion is a remarkably favourable specimen of the period. 

It now only remains for me to notice the modern glass in the 
cathedral ; which is comprised in the windows of the Lady 
Chapel, the eastern triplet of the choir, and the south windows 
of the great south transept, with the exception of the two upper 

The eastern triplet of the Lady Chapel is filled with a repre- 
sentation of the Eesurrection, designed by Sir Joshua Reynolds, 1 
and executed by Francis Egington of Birmingham. I do not 
question the intrinsic merit of this composition, but it is unfor- 
tunately not of a nature suited to a glass-painting. The prin- 
cipal object, and indeed the only figure represented, is our Lord 
ascending from the tomb. In the distance are dimly seen the 
three crosses on Mount Calvary. Light emanating from our 
Saviour's person illuminates the objects in His immediate pre- 
sence ; all around is gloom. This effect is produced by means 
which cannot be satisfactorily resorted to in a glass-painting, — 
the keeping of a very large portion of the picture in compara- 
tive obscurity. For a gloomy or obscure effect in painted glass, 
however it may be aided by the employment of pot-metals, &c, 
of deep tint, can only be produced by an exclusion of the light, 
with nearly opaque enamels. And this, when carried beyond 
a certain limit, occasions a flat, heavy, and, paradoxical as it 
may appear, flimsy appearance, destructive of all impressiveness, 

1 It is stated in Gilpin's ' Western the ground that he had thereby en- 
Counties,' that in his first design for hanced the character of the miracle. 
the window Sir Joshua represented the It is more probable that Sir Joshua 
mouth of the tomb closed ; and when defended himself on the authority of 
remonstrated with, defended himself on ancient precedents. 


and widely different from the depth and transparency of a 
picture in oils painted in equally deep tones. The task was 
thus imposed on the glass-painter — even had he possessed suf- 
ficient genius, instead of literally copying his model, to have 
embodied its spirit — of representing what is particularly difficult, 
if not incapable, of adequate representation in painted glass. A 
skilful glass-colourist might, to a certain extent, have succeeded 
in imparting to the window an effect more in accordance with 
Sir Joshua Reynolds's intention ; but the course adopted by 
Egington, of executing the window entirely on white glass, with 
enamel colours and stains, was of all others that most calculated 
to ensure an unsatisfactory result. In comparison with what 
might have been effected, the colouring of the window is weak, 
and its brightest lights are dull ; and the red-brown enamel in 
the landscape and sky, unaided by pot-metal glass, wholly fails 
of producing that supernatural lurid appearance which seems 
to have been intended by Sir Joshua Reynolds. 

The remaining windows of the Lady Chapel are also painted 
by Egington. They are filled with a quarry pattern, having a 
dull red rose stained in the midst of each quarry, and thickly 
covered with a reddish -brown ground. The effect of these 
windows, like that of the east window, is dull and heavy, with- 
out being deep or impressive. 

The subject in the east window of the choir is the Lifting up 
of the Brazen Serpent in the Wilderness. It was executed by 
Pearson, after a design by Mortimer, and as a glass-painting is 
certainly superior to the east window of the Lady Chapel. The 
design is, in principle, not unsuitable to a glass-painting ; there 
are no overpowering masses of heavy shadow, and the more 
positive colours are carried to the extreme verge of the picture. 
The colouring is lively, and the picture has a certain degree of 
brilliancy. Pot-metal glass, as well as enamel colours and stains, 
is employed. Still I cannot admit the fitness of the painting 
for its situation. The character of the architecture is severe, 
solemn, and gloomy ; and would therefore appear to demand in 
the glass-painting simplicity of composition and colouring, as 
well as depth of tone : in short, a character the veiy opposite 
to that of the present window. A genuine Early English 
Pattern window, though possessing but little positive colour, 
would, owing to its depth of effect, and the gravity and solemnity 
of its appearance, have suited the place better. The "Five 
Sisters" harmonize admirably with the architecture of the north 


transept of York. Another ground of objection appears to be, 
that the design is carried across the triplet independent of the 
divisions of the lights. It has been shown in a former part of 
this paper, that the practice of extending the design of a glass- 
painting beyond the limits of a single light is not only fully 
supported by the best authorities, but is strictly in accordance 
with the principles of mediaeval composition. And indeed, when 
the lights are divided merely by mullions, the practice might 
safely be allowed to rest on its own merits : for, without having 
recourse to it, it would often be impossible to break, by the 
occasional introduction of a group, the painful monotony which 
would otherwise be occasioned by the continual repetition of 
single figures throughout a series of windows, or even in one 
large window, and at the same time ensure to the group suf- 
ficient size to produce a satisfactory effect. But in the present 
instance the lights are separated not by mullions, but by portions 
of wall, of such breadth as materially to weaken, if not destroy, 
the idea of the continuity of the subject ; and thus an unpleasing 
effect is produced. 

It may be conceded, that in this particular window the use 
of a landscape background is unfortunate, because it is opposed 
to that simplicity of colouring which is most in harmony with 
the character of the architecture. But apart from this consi- 
deration, the objection so continually urged in certain quarters 
against the employment in a painted window of such a land- 
scape background as is compatible with the conditions of glass- 
painting, is untenable. It is true that the lead-lines, and want 
of atmosphere inseparable from painted glass, would be fatal to 
the effect of a glass-painting in which a landscape formed the 
most prominent object ; but the landscape suitable to a glass- 
painting is a mere accessory, one of whose functions is as it were 
to tie together the composition, and which is very subordinate in 
interest to that of other parts of the composition. And such a 
landscape may be represented very adequately in painted glass, 1 
quite as naturally indeed as any other object can be represented 
in a window. No objection founded on the want of means of 
representation can be urged against the use of a landscape in 
painted glass, which would not apply with equal force against 
its employment in a fresco, or other large picture. It is possible, 

1 This is denied in a recent article in the ' Ecclesiologist,' No. 74, p. 81 ; but the 
confusion of the writer's ideas is such as to render further comment superfluous. 


no doubt, to represent almost any subject without sucli an ad- 
junct ; but none can deny the power of a landscape, when 
properly introduced, in assisting the picture, by an additional 
appeal to nature, to the performance of its true office, — that 
of awakening in the mind a lively idea of the subject repre- 
sented. It therefore seems foolish, without some good reason, 
to debar the artist from availing himself of it. The landscape 
in Raphael's Miraculous Draught of Fishes has often been 
deservedly commended ; if omitted, would the picture have 
proved so striking and effective ? 

It has sometimes been contended that the use of a landscape 
in any mural painting, and by consequence in a glass-painting, 
is improper ; because, when we see a landscape painted on a 
wall, we know that we do not look upon an opening ; that, when 
we see a landscape high up in a church window, we know that 
it is impossible that a landscape could be visible through a 
window in such a situation . The objection, however, is rather 
ingenious than solid. It rests on a misapprehension of the true 
and proper end of painting. This is not delusion ; it is not to 
make the spectator suppose that the object represented is really 
present in the place where it is represented ; it is only to awaken 
in the mind a lively idea of this object. "Imitations," says 
Dr. Johnson, " produce pain or pleasure, not because they are 
mistaken for realities, but because they bring realities to mind. 
When the imagination is recreated by a painted landscape, the 
trees are not supposed capable to give us shade, or the fountains 
coolness ; but we consider how we should be pleased with such 
fountains playing beside us, and such woods waving over us." 
It is admitted that no one mistakes any such representation 
for a reality; it is therefore hard to perceive what possible 
impropriety there can be in our being suffered to see the repre- 
sentation in a spot where the reality cannot be, or why a rule 
should be applied to landscapes which does not hold good as to 
other subjects of painting. A third objection, and, as it seems 
to me, the only ground admitting of argument, is the difficulty 
of seeing such pictures from the true perspective point of sight ; 
but the fact that numbers of pictures are viewed from what is 
not the true point of sight, and are yet seen with undiminished 
pleasure, seems to afford a complete answer to it. 

The only other painted windows of the cathedral are those in 
the great south transept. The two topmost lights of the south 
end are, as before-mentioned, filled with early glass. The rest 



contain modern copies of the Early English patterns, except the 
centre-light of the lowest triplet, which appears to be modern in 
design. These windows afford one of the many proofs that, how- 
ever closely the design of ancient glass is copied, the imitation 
cannot be complete unless the texture of the ancient material is 
copied also= 




(From the Archaeological Journal, volume ix.) 

jT has often been to me a matter of surprise that 
there should still be wanting, not only a detailed 
account, but even an accui'ate catalogue, of the 
numerous and interesting specimens of ancient 
painted glass existing in the public and colle- 
giate buildings of Oxford, considering the number 
of persons addicted to Archaeological pursuits 
who enjoy in an Oxford residence, and leisure 
time, peculiar facilities for such an undertaking. 

The present paper hardly pretends to supply the latter desi- 
deratum, even in respect of the single example which forms its 
subject. I have had neither time nor opportunity to test the 
accuracy of my researches as rigidly as I could have wished ; nor 
have I sought for any other documentary evidence than what 
has already appeared in print ; therefore, what I have written 
must be regarded as a contribution only towards a more full and 
perfect description of the painted glass in New College Chapel 
and Hall. The labour expended upon it will, I dare say, be appre- 
ciated by those who have actually prosecuted similar inquiries. 

It will render the following remarks on the glass in New 
College Chapel more intelligible if I state, at the outset, that 
this building consists of an Antechapel, or Transept, and of a 
Choir, or Inner Chapel, at right angles to it ; — that the ante- 
chapel is furnished with a central west window, having fourteen 
lower lights — the widest in the chapel — arranged in two tiers, 
and a head of tracery, to which no further allusion need be made ; 
two smaller west windows, one on either side the last, each 
having eight lower lights arranged in two tiers, and eighteen 
tracery lights, six only of which are capable of containing 
figures ; two windows on the north, and one on the south side, 
precisely similar to the last in size and arrangement ; and two 


east windows, facing the smaller west windows, having twelve 
lower lights apiece — the narrowest in the chapel — and fourteen 
tracery lights, ten only of which are capable of containing 
figures ; — and that the choir is furnished with five south and five 
north windows, of the same dimensions and arrangement as the 
smaller west windows of the antechapel. 

I have been thus minute in noticing the relative widths of the 
lower lights of these windows, because the soundness of the con- 
clusions at which I have arrived respecting the original arrange- 
ment of the glass in the chapel, in great measure depends on 
the fact of the lights of the two east windows being the nar- 
rowest, though of equal length with the others. 

The remains of the oldest or original glazing are dispersed 
throughout all these windows, with the exception of the central 
west window ; and from such an examination of them as time 
and circumstances have permitted, it appears to me that, when 
in a perfect state, the lower lights of the northernmost of the 
west windows, and of the two north windows of the antechapel, 
contained representations of the Patriarchs and other worthies 
of the Old Testament — a single figure under a canopy occupying 
each light; that in like manner the lower lights of the two 
east windows of the antechapel contained representations of the 
twelve Apostles, and of our Lord's Crucifixion, four times re- 
peated ; that similar representations of Old and New Testament 
and Church saints and worthies occupied the lower lights of the 
south and smaller west windows of the antechapel, and most 
probably the lower lights of all the choir windows ; and that the 
various orders of angels l were represented in the principal 
tracery lights of the antechapel and choir windows, besides the 
Coronation of the Virgin, and Wykeham's Adoration of Christ, 
which are to be seen in the tracery of the east windows of the 
antechapel. I have no other clue to the subjects formerly 
represented in the central west window than what is derivable 
from the fragments removed from this window to make way for 
Sir Joshua Keynolds's design, and which are still, I believe, pre- 
served in boxes at Winchester College. From the names which 
I found on searching these fragments during the Institute's visit 
to Winchester in 1845, I conclude that single canopied figures 
of Church saints occupied the lower lights of this window ; but 
I should state that I also met with part of a small mitre, appa- 
rently belonging to the subject of Becket's Martyrdom, which, 

1 One complete set of angels is engraved in ' The Calendar of the Auglican 
Church illustrated,' Parker, Oxford, p. 116. 

2 K 

3 32 


however, judging from the small size of the mitre, might have 
been inserted in the tracery lights of this window. 1 

I am sensible that the opinion I have formed respecting the 
original arrangement of the glass rests partly on hypothesis, 
partly on evidence, in no case conclusive, and in many cases 
weak and uncertain. AVith this apology I must leave the matter 
in the reader's hands, and hope that he will be amused with the 
description I shall give of the glass, however much he may 
otherwise differ from my views. 

It will be convenient to commence with an examination of the 
glass in the northernmost of the west windows of the ante- 
chapel, in which window, as it would seem, the series of subjects 
originally began ; and, in order to compensate as much as pos- 
sible for the Avant of illustrative aid, I give the accompanying 
diagram of this window, in which the lower lights are distin- 
guished by numbeis, and the principal tracery lights by letters. 








2 3 



6 7 8 

I shall employ the same diagram in explanation of all the other 
windows, except the central west and the two east windows of 
the antechapel. 


Each of the eight lower lights of this window is occupied, as 
already mentioned, with a canopy containing a single figure; 
and I will state, since an attention to such minutias will tend 
materially to facilitate our investigation of the other windows, 

1 The glass in Winchester College 
chapel unfortunately throws no light on 
the subject. That chapel has no west 
window. Its side windows are fitted 
with canopied figures of saints and 
angels; and its east window with a 
design composed of the following sub- 
jects : The Stem of Jesse, the Cruci- 

fixion, and the Last Judgment, When 
represented by itself, the Last Judg- 
ment is, I believe, most commonly 
assigned to a west window, but, when 
associated with the Crucifixion, it is 
very frequently met with in an east 
window. The Crucifixion is usually 
represented in an east window. 


that each of the canopies in Nos. 1 and 3 has a flat hood, its 
spire background coloured blue, and the tapestry back of its 
niche, which extends upwards to the groining of the niche, red ; 
and that the canopies in Nos. 2 and 4 have projecting hoods, red 
spire-grounds, and blue tapestries ; whilst, in the lower tier of 
lights, Nos. 5 and 7 have projecting hoods, blue spire-grounds, 
and red tapestries ; and Nos. 6 and 8 flat hoods, red spire-grounds, 
and blue tapestries. By these means, as will be perceived, a 
perfect alternation of form and colour is maintained throughout 
the canopies. All the canopies have projecting pedestals ; but 
those only of the lower tier of lights are crossed by the founder's 
legend, " Orate pro Willelmo de Wykeham episcopo Wynton 
fundatore istius collegii," which is written upon a continuous 
scroll, divided only by the mullions of the window. 

Light No. 1. Jonas p'pheta is written across the pedestal of 
the canopy. The figure, which, like the other Old Testament 
worthies, has no nimbus, holds a scroll inscribed, Hebreus ego su' 
<f dominie' oVm cell ego timeo. (See Jonah i. 9.) The tapestry is 
powdered with letters I, crowned. 1 

No. 2. Joel p'pheta is written on the pedestal of the canopy. 
The scroll held by the figure is inscribed, In valle josaphath 
iudicavit o'es ge'tes. (See Joel iii. 12, of which this seems a para- 
phrase.) The tapestry is powdered with letters I, crowned. 

No. 3. Amos \ppli\eta 2 is written on the pedestal. The scroll 
is inscribed, qui \ceoT\ificat in celu' assenc'one' sua'. (See Amos ix. 
6.) The tapestry is powdered with letters A, crowned. 

No. 4. Micheas p'pheta is written on the pedestal. The scroll 
is inscribed, De [#«'] on exhibit [egredietur lux <f v\erbm' de vert. 
(See Micah iv. 2.) The tapestry is powdered with letters M, 

No. 5. Ada' pm' pa\tef\ is written on the pedestal. The 
figure holds a spade, and looks sorrowful. The tapestry is 
powdered with letters A, crowned. Part of the founder's legend 
is written across the pedestal of this and the next three cano- 

No. 6. Eva mr oi'u viveciu' is written on the pedestal. The 
figure holds a distaff. The tapestry is powdered with letters E, 

1 The crowned letters bring to mind On whiche was first yritten a crouned A, 

^i > -n i a ,i r\ j. -U And alter, Amor vincit omnia." 

Chaucer s Prologue to the Canterbury 

Tales : 2 The missing parts of the inscrip- 

,,,. „ „ , . , . , , tions, when this is practicable, are sup- 

" Of small co rail aboute hire arm she bare ' * ' r 

A pair of bedes gauded all with grene, plied within brackets. 

And thereon heng a broche of gold ful shene, 


No 7. Seth filius Add is written on the pedestal. The figure 
holds a book. The tapestry is powdered with letters S, crowned. 

No. 8. Enoch traslat' is written on the pedestal. The figure 
holds a small scroll, inscribed, ivit cu deo. The tapestry is pow- 
dered with letters E, crowned. 

The tracery lights of this window, A to F inclusive, are each 
filled with a canopy under which stands an angel. Troni is 
written upon a small scroll at the foot of each canopy in the 
lights A and B. The angels throughout these tracery lights are 
alike in design. The canopies have alternately blue spire-grounds 
and red tapestries, or vice versa. The smaller tracery lights are 
filled with ornaments, such as leaves, monsters, &c, painted upon 
white and yellow stained glass. 


Light No. 1. Osee p'pheta is written on the pedestal. The 
figure holds a scroll inscribed, mors ero \_mo\rs tua morsus tuus 
ero inferne. (See Hosea xiii. 14.) The tapestry is powdered 
with letters H, crowned. From which I infer either that the 
tapestry does not belong to this figure, or that in the course of 
repairs wrong letters have been inserted. However, it may have 
been a mere caprice to aspirate the name. 

No. 2. Abacuch p'pheta is written on the pedestal. The scroll 
is inscribed, D'ne audivi [auditijde tua? $ timui. (See Habakkuk 
iii. 2.) The tapestry is powdered with letters A, crowned. 

No. 3. Ysaias p'pheta is written on the pedestal. The scroll is 
inscribed, Ecce virgo concipiet <f pariet filium. (See Isaiah vii. 14.) 
The tapestry is powdered with letters Y, crowned. 

No. 4. [M\aruc p'pheta is written on the pedestal. The scroll 
is inscribed, Post hec in tris visus est $ cuC horri cdvsatus est. 
(See Baruch iii. 37.) The tapestry is, however, powdered with 
letters M, crowned. Most of the remarks made on No. 1 equally 
apply here. 

No. 5. Mathusale fill's Enoch is written on the pedestal. The 
figure holds a small scroll, which appears to be inscribed with 
the following words : Legem n mor\ The tapestry is powdered 
with letters M, crowned. The following portion of the founder's 
legend is written across the pedestal : Orate p Wtttm'o. 

No. 6. Noe : ,j : archa : fab'la is written on the pedestal. The 
figure holds an oar. The tapestry is powdered with letters N, 
crowned. The portion of the founder's legend that crosses the 
pedestal is de W 

No. 7. Abraha' p'riarcha is written on the pedestal. The 


tapestry is powdered with letters A, crowned. The portion of 
the founder's legend which crosses the pedestal is ... . ton 

No. 8. Isaac patriarclia is written on the pedestal. The 
tapestry is powdered with letters I, crowned. The portion of 
the founder's legend attached to this pedestal is istius 

Each of the tracery lights, A to F inclusive, is filled with a 
canopy, under which is a military figure, winged as an angel, 
clad in a basinet and camail, jupon, broad sword-belt, petticoat 
of mail below the jupon, and plate or cuirbouilli arm and leg 
armour. The figure holds a spear, to which a pennon charged 
with a plain cross is attached. Prin : ci : pa : tus is written on 
a small scroll at the foot of each canopy in the lights A and B. 
The smaller tracery lights are filled with ornaments as in the 
last window. 


No. 1 light. Sophonias p'plia is written on the pedestal of 
the canopy. The scroll held by the figure is inscribed, Sec est 
civitas gVriosa quia dicit ego sum. (See Zephaniah ii. 15.) The 
tapestry is powdered with letters S, crowned. 

No. 2. Daniel p'pheta is written on the pedestal. The figure 
points downwards with its right hand, as if in allusion to the den 
of lions. On the scroll is written, Post ebdomadas septuagenta 
(sic) duas occif. (See Daniel ix. 26.) The tapestry is powdered 
with letters D, crowned. 

No. 3. Jeremias p'pha is written on the pedestal. The scroll is 
incribed Patre' vocabis me dicit d'ns. (See Jeremiah iii. 19). The 
tapestry is powdered with letters I, crowned. Across the pedestal 
is written the following portion of the founder's legend, orate 

p ; which is either an insertion, or else shows that this 

figure was taken from some other window having prophets in its 
lower tier of lights. 

No. 4. Abdias p'pha is written on the pedestal. The scroll is 
inscribed, et rectum erit d"nm d'ni amen. The tapestry is pow- 
dered with letters A, crowned. 

No. 5. Jacobus par is written on the pedestal. The 

tapestry is powdered with letters I, crowned. The following 
portion of the founder's legend is written across the pedestal, 
orate p Willmo. 

No. 6. Judas ma ... . (Machabeus ?) is written on the 
pedestal. The figure has a coronet and sceptre. The tapestry 
is powdered with letters I, crowned. The following portion of 



the founder's legend is written across the pedestal : de WykeKm 

No. 7. Moyses dux P'li del is written on the pedestal. The 
figure holds in his left hand a green diptych, inscribed with 
Loin bardic capitals. The tapestry is powdered with letters M, 
crowned. The pedestal is crossed with the following portion of 
the founder's legend : Wynton fu'dator. 

No. 8. Aard is written on the pedestal. The lower part of 
the tapestry is powdered with letters A, crowned, and the fol- 
lowing portion of the founder's legend crosses the pedestal : istius 
collegii ; — but the feet only of the figure belong to the high priest; 
the rest belongs to a prophet, part of another window, who 
appears to be Nahum, from the corresponding part of the tapestry 
being powdered with letters N, crowned, and from the following 
inscription on the scroll held by the figure : ecce sup' montes 
ew'ageliz'atis anricatis. (See Nahum i. 15.) 

Each of the tracery lights, A to F inclusive, is filled with a 
canopy, under which is a winged figure habited in the civil dress 
of a king, i. e. crowned, holding a sword and sceptre, and clad in 
a tunic with short skirts, a furred tippet, hose, and shoes. Dna : 
cio : nes is written on a small scroll at the foot of each canopy in 
the lights A and B. The smaller tracery lights are filled with 
ornaments as in former windows. 


The arrangement of the subjects of these windows in their 
original order is a somewhat troublesome task, requiring a close 
attention to detail, and continual references to individual lights. 














































It will be convenient to distinguish the windows by calling one 


the Northern-East window, and the other the Southern-East 
window ; and, with a view to render the following investigation 
more intelligible, I give diagrams of both windows, in which 
the lower lights are numbered, and the principal tracery lights 
lettered, in a consecutive series, commencing in the northern- 
east window. 

No. 1 light. The glass in this light consists of portions of 
several designs. The upper part of the light is occupied with the 
head of a canopy, the spire background of which is red. From 
its fitting the light, and there being only three others like it in 
the building, I conclude that it belongs to one of the canopies con- 
taining a crucifix hereafter mentioned. Below is part of another 
canopy cut to fit the light, under which is placed the upper part 
of a female figure on a red tapestry background, powdered with 
letters C, crowned. This figure does not belong to either window. 
Below it is the central part of another figure, on a blue tapestry 
background, powdered with letters E, crowned ; which likewise 
does not belong to either window. The remainder of the light 
is filled with the lower part of a canopy, which, as 1 shall have 
occasion to refer to it again, I shall describe minutely. The 
pedestal of this canopy differs in design from that of any of the 
canopies in either window, except the three which I shall pre- 
sently mention. In particular, it is much more lofty, is hollow, 
and within it is the sitting figure of an aged man, supported on 
the top of a tall slender pedestal or shaft. A scroll passes through 
the pedestal of the canopy a little below the figure just men- 
tioned, and at the same height from the sill of the light as that 
at which the pedestals of the canopies in Nos. 4, 19, 20, 21, 22, 
23, and 24, hereafter described, are crossed by the founder's 
legend. The portion of the scroll in the present case is inscribed, 
episc — - — . The lower part of the canopy niche remains ; on its 
floor are three steps coloured green, surmounted by what is 
evidently the shaft of a cross coloured purple, on each side of 
which is a small portion of a white cloud ; the rest of the subject 
is wanting. The inside of the niche has a blue tapestry ground, 
powdered with little yellow saltiers, or letters X. 

No. 2. In the head of this light, and exactly fitting it, is the 
head of a canopy on a blue spire-ground, exactly like that first 
mentioned in No. 1 . The rest of the glass, consisting of part 
of a canopy which has been cut to fit the light, half a female 
figure on a blue tapestry ground powdered with letters C, crowned, 
part of the hood of a canopy, and part of the base of another, 
inscribed Mart Salome, does not belong to either window. 


No. 3. In the head of the light, and exactly fitting it, is the 
head of a canopy on a red spire-ground exactly like that first 
mentioned in No. 1. Below is part of a canopy which has been 
cut to fit the light. Under it is the upper half of a female 
figure (which does not appear to belong to the canopy), on a blue 
tapestry ground, powdered with letters E, crowned. Below are 
fragments of canopy-work made into a sort of pattern ; and the 
residue of the light is occupied with the pedestal, and part of 
the niche of a canopy, which clearly was originally of the same 
design as that described in No. 1. The only difference is, that 
here the steps of the cross are coloured purple, the shafts green, 
and the tapestry ground red. The scroll running through the 
pedestal is made up of fragments of other scrolls. 

No. 4. The whole of this light is occupied with a representa- 
tion of a figure and canopy. The canopy, across whose pedestal 
is written the following portion of the founder's legend, Istius 
collegii, is, in other respects, exactly like that in No. 19 light. 
The figure is a duplicate of that in No. 24 light. Any further 
description of either is, therefore, postponed for the present. 

No. 5. In the head of the light, and exactly fitting it, is the 
head of a canopy on a blue spire-ground exactly like that first 
mentioned in No. 1. Below is part of a canopy cut to fit the 
light, and the upper half of a female figure holding a palm- 
branch, on a red tapestry ground, powdered with letters M, 
crowned. A piece of yellow glass has been accidentally inserted 
in the nimbus of this figure, in such a manner as, at first sight, 
to impart to it a cruciferous appearance. The figure does not 
belong to either window. The remainder of the light is filled 
with a pedestal and part of a niche of a canopy, precisely similar 
to that described in No. 1. The steps of the cross are here 
green, the shaft is purple, the tapestry red, and on the scroll 
running through the pedestal is written Wynton. 

No. 6. In the upper part of the light is the top of a canopy, 
of the same design as that in No. 4 light, having a red spire- 
ground. Below is part of the hood of a canopy, cut to fit the 
light, under which are fragments of a male saint (which do not 
belong to either window), on a blue tapestry ground, powdered 
with letters B, crowned. The remainder of the light is filled 
with the pedestal and part of the niche of a canopy similar to 
that described in No. 1. The steps of the cross are green, the 
shaft is pink, the clouds, as in all the other examples, are white ; 
and seven of the toes of the Saviour are still attached to the 
shaft, leaving the nature of the design no longer in doubt. The 


tapestry ground of the niche is blue, powdered with yellow letters 
X ; and the scroll which passes through the pedestal is inscribed 

No. 7. This is a figure and canopy light. The canopy hood is 
supported by a semicircular niche arch ; its spire background is 
blue, and the niche tapestry is red. Precisely similar canopies 
are inserted in Nos. 9 and 11, and in Nos. 13, 15, and 17 also. 
The pedestal is inscribed Sc's Petru\ The figure, which exhibits 
the tonsure, carries a book in one hand and keys in the other ; 
it is clad in blue and white robes, the white being powdered with 
letters P, crowned, drawn in outline, and stained yellow. 

No. 8. This is also a figure and canopy light. The canopy 
hood is double-headed ; its spire-ground is coloured pink or warm 
purple, and the niche tapestry is blue, powdered with small 
yellow stars or suns rayonnes. Precisely similar canopies are 
inserted in Nos. 10, 12, 14, 16, and 18. The pedestal is inscribed 
Scs Andrea 1 . The figure carries a small saltier. 

No. 9. The pedestal is inscribed Scs Jacob". The figure holds 
a pilgrim's staff. 

No. 10. The pedestal is inscribed Scs J\ohan^es. The figure 
carries a cup, from which a dragon issues, and is clad in red and 
white robes, the white being powdered with small dragons 
issuing from cups, drawn in outline, and stained yellow. 

No. 11 is inscribed Scs Thoma. The figure holds a spear in 
the left hand ; the forefinger of the right is uplifted, — a move- 
ment which, coupled with the general attitude of the figure, 
seems to allude to the means whereby the Saint's incredulity was 

No. 12 is inscribed Scs Jacob'. The figure, which carries a 
scimitar, is clad in red and white garments, the white being 
powdered with small monsters, drawn in outline and stained 

No. 13 is inscribed Scs Philippic. 

No. 14 is inscribed Scs Bartole'm. The figure carries a knife. 

No. 15 is inscribed Scs Mathe. 

No. 16 is inscribed Scs Simon. The figure bears an axe. 

No. 17 is inscribed Scs Matliid. The figure carries a club. 

No. 18 is inscribed Sc's Judas. 

No. 19. The canopy in this light differs in design from any of 
those already described, though its hood is as long as those in 
No. 7 and the following lights. The pedestal is crossed with the 
founder's legend, at the same level as the pedestal in No. 1, &c. 
The spire background is red, and the tapestry blue. The figure 


under the canopy is, from the sorrowful expression of the coun- 
tenance, evidently a representation of the Mater Dolorosa : the 
left hand is pressed against the head ; in the other is a book. 
The figure looks towards its left. There is no other inscription 
except the following portion of the founder's legend, Orate p 
Willo, which, as before mentioned, crosses the pedestal of the 

No. 20. The canopy is of the same design as the last, but its 
spire background is coloured blue, and its tapestry is red, 
powdered with letters M, crowned. The figure is evidently a 
representation of the Mater Dolorosa. The hands are clasped 
together ; the figure looks to its left. The pedestal is crossed 
with the following portion of the founder's legend : Funclatore. 

No. 21. The canopy is of the same design as No. 19, and has 
a red spire-ground. The tapestry is blue, but is powdered with 
yellow crosses. The figure, which looks to its right, is evidently 
a representation of St. John the Evangelist. The right hand is 
pressed against the head, but the countenance is not particularly 
sorrowful. The pedestal is crossed with the following portion of 
the founder's legend : Episcopo. 

No. 22. The canopy is of the same design as No. 19. The 
spire background is blue, and the tapestry is red, powdered with 
letters M, crowned. The figure is an exact duplicate of that in 
No. 20. The portion of the founder's legend is, Wynton. 

No. 23. The canopy is of the same design as the last, but the 
spire-ground is red and the tapestry blue, powdered with yellow 
crosses. The figure is a perfect duplicate of that in No. 21. 
The portion of the founder's legend is, de Wykeham. 

Xo. 24. The canopy is of the same design as No. 19, but the 
spire-ground is blue, and the tapestry is red, pow T dered with 
letters |, crowned. The figure, which, as before mentioned, is 
an exact duplicate of that in No. 4, is evidently a representation 
of St. John the Evangelist. The countenance is sorrowful ; the 
right hand is pressed against the head, in the other is a book. 
The pedestal is crossed with the following portion of the founder's 
legend : istius collegii. 


A is occupied with the representation, under a small canopy, 
of a Bishop on his knees, in apparent adoration of the figure in 
B, which, though mutilated, may be easily recognised as that 
of our Saviour, seated, and exhibiting the wound in his side to 
the kneeling Bishop, which, I apprehend, personifies William of 


Wykeham. This figure is likewise under a canopy. An angel 
under a canopy is inserted in each of the lights C to K inclusive. 
The smaller tracery lights are filled with monsters or other 

The Coronation of the Virgin is represented in L and M, but 
the subjects have been transposed, the figure of Christ now 
occupying L, and that of the Virgin Bf. Each figure is under a 
canopy. An angel, in female attire, under a canopy, occupies 
each of the lights N to V, inclusive. The smaller tracery lights 
are filled with monsters or other ornaments. 

Having described the subjects in these windows, I proceed in 
the next place to state my reasons for supposing that they were 
oricnnallv arranged as I have mentioned. 

One remarkable feature is, that the pedestal of no canopy in 
the lights Nos. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18 is 
crossed by anv continuous scroll, and that the pedestals of the 
canopies in Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 are so 
crossed ; the scroll being, as before mentioned, inscribed with the 
founder's legend. This circumstance, when considered with 
reference to the design and arrangement of the glass in the other 
windows of the building — the contents of one of the west and of 
the two north windows of the antechapel have already been 
described — raises a strong inference that the glass in the first- 
mentioned series of lights originally occupied an upper tier of 
lights, and that the glass in the series of lights secondly men- 
tioned originally occupied a lower tier of lights. That such 
lights are the lights of these two windows is evident from the 
fact of their being the narrowest lights in the building, and that 
the glass exactly fits them. 

Let us, then, re-arrange the glass upon this supposition, and 
put in No. 1 light what is now in No. 7 light ; in No. 2 what is 
now in No. 8 ; in No. 3 what is now in No. 9 ; in No. 4 what is 
now in No. 10; in No. 5 what is now in No. 11 ; in No. 6 what 
is now in No. 12 ; leaving the glass in Nos. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 
and 18 as it now is ; and we shall find the Apostles arranged in a 
not uncommon order, 1 and a perfect alternation preserved in 
the forms of the canopies, and in the colouring of the designs, 
throughout the upper tier of lights. Let us now put in No. 7 

1 It is possible that Xos. 15 and 17 the apostles would be arranged as at 

are transposed. If St. Matthias were to Fairford church, Gloucestershire, with 

take the place of St. Matthew, which the single exception that there St. 

there is nothing in the order of the Matthew precedes St. Jude. 
canopy design or colouring to prevent, 


light the glass which is in No. 20 light; in No. 8 the re- 
mains of the canopy- work first mentioned in No. 1, and the 
portion of the crucifix in No. 1 ; in No. 9 what is now in No. 4 ; 
in No. 11 the remains of the canopy-work first mentioned in 
No. 2, and the portion of the crucifix in No. 5 ; in No. 12 what 
is now in No. 23 ; in No. 20 the remains of the canopy-work first 
mentioned in No. 5, and the portion of the crucifix in No. 3; 
and in No. 23 the remains of the canopy-work first mentioned in 
No. 3, and the portion of the crucifix in No. 6 ; leaving No. 10 
blank, and the glass in Nos. 19, 21, 22, and 24 as it now is ; 
and we shall find, supposing the missing subject of No. 10 light 
to have been a duplicate of that in No. 19, 1 and that the remains 
of the canopy-work first mentioned in No. 6 belonged to it, 
that not only will a perfect alternation in the forms of the 
canopies and the colouring of the subjects be preserved through- 
out the east Avindows, in the one whether regarded in a hori- 
zontal or in a perpendicular direction, 2 in the other when 
regarded in a horizontal direction — and it is obvious that a 
double alternation might, by a different arrangement, be pro- 
duced in this as well as in the former window — but that the 
attitudes of the figures will correspond with the arrangement of 
the subjects. Thus, the Virgin and St. John, if placed according 
to the new arrangement in the lights Nos. 7 and 9, would 
be turned towards the crucifix in No. 8'; the Virgin in No. 10 
light (which I have supplied by copying the figure in No. 19), 
and the St. John put in No. 12 light, would be turned towards 

1 It is by no means an uncommon with the blue spire-ground of C; the 
occurrence to find in ancient glass the blue tapestry of A with the red tapestry 
same figures repeated in different or of C ; the red spire-ground of B with 
even the same windows of the same the blue spire-ground of D ; the blue 
building. I know of an instance as tapestry of B with the red tapestry of 
early as the latter part of the twelfth D. And when regarded vertically, the 
century. masses of colour will alternate thus : — 

2 This alternation of design and the red spire-ground of A with the 
colour is observable in many early Per- blue tapestry of A, this again with the 
pendicular windows. The following red spire-ground of B, and this again 
diagram may serve to explain my mean- with the blue tapestry of B ; and so, 

ing. Let the letters arranged in the blue spire-ground of C with the red 

AC a square represent four figures tapestry of C, this with the blue spire- 

B D and canopies : and let canopies ground of D, and this with the red 

A and B each have a red spire- tapestry of D. Of course, if the cano- 
ground, and blue niche tapestry ; and pies A and D are of one design, and B 
canopies C and D each have a blue and C of another, their different pat- 
spire-ground, and red niche tapestry, terns will likewise alternate. To put 
It will follow that the masses of colour, precisely the same case as that in the 
when regarded horizontally, will alter- text, the canopies must be supposed to 
nate thus : — the red spire-ground of A be of four different patterns. 


the crucifix in No. 11 light; and the Virgins in Nos. 19 and 22, 
and the St. Johns in Nos. 21 and 24, would he turned, respec- 
tively, towards the crucifixes in Nos. 20 and 23 lights. 

It is true that the portions of the founder's legend attached 
to the glass now in Nos. 1, 4, 5, 20, and 23 lights, will not make 
sense under the new arrangement of the subjects, but this 
circumstance is entitled to no weight. The inscriptions on the 
pedestals of Nos. 1 and 5 have evidently been made up of frag- 
ments, and there is no reason why we should not suppose that those 
on the pedestals of Nos. 4, 20, and 23 have likewise been sup- 
plied in the course of repairs. For it is impossible by any arrange- 
ment of the subjects to bring the word written on the pedestal 
of No. 20 into its proper place in the legend, or to arrange 
matters so as to make both parts of the legend attached to the 
pedestals of Nos. 4 and 23 fall into the inscription ; one part or 
the other must be rejected as an insertion. On the other hand, 
the parts of the legend attached to the pedestals now in the 
lights Nos. 6, 19, 21, 22, and 24 will be found to read correctly 
on the suggested re-arrangement of the subjects. The pedestal 
in No. 3 light is, as before mentioned, at present without any 
legend at all. 

It is unnecessary to speculate on the reasons which may have 
led to the fourfold repetition of the Crucifixion in the lower part 
of these windows; but lest this repetition should appear un- 
favourable to the view I take of the original arrangement of the 
glass, I will add that no subject is more commonly represented 
in a window above an altar than the Crucifixion, and that it is by 
no means improbable that four altars, two under each window, 
were placed against the east wall of the transept, or antechapel, 
although no trace of them may now exist. 


This is a figure and canopy window like the windows on the 
north side. 

No. 1 light. Sc's is written across the pedestal of 

the canopy. The figure is that of a Bishop. The tapestry 
of the niche is powdered with the letters P, crowned. 

No. 2. Sc's Pelagius is written across the pedestal of the 
canopy. The figure is that of a Pope, having a tiara encircled 
with only one coronet. The niche tapestry is powdered with 
letters P, crowned. 

No. 3. Sc's Alphegus is written across the pedestal. The 


figure is that of an Archbishop. The niche tapestry is powdered 
with letters A, crowned. 

No. 4. Se's Gremreta is written across the pedestal. The figure 
is that of a Bishop. The niche tapestry is powdered with letters 
G, crowned. 

No. 5. Se's Athanasius is written on the pedestal, which is 
crossed by the following portion of the founder's legend : — Orate 
p Willo. The figure is that of a Bishop. The niche tapestry is 
powdered with letters A, crowned. 

No. 6. Ses \Barn\aroV is written on the pedestal, which is 
crossed by the following portion of the founder's legend : — 
Wynton fu , d\_atore]. The figure is habited as a monk, in a russet 
dress. The niche tapestry is powdered with letters B, crowned. 

No. 7. Se's appears on the pedestal, which is crossed by 

the following part of the founder's legend: — Wynton fu'dator. 
The figure is that of a Bishop. The niche tapestry is powdered 
with letters H, crowned. 

No. 8. Ses Anselmus is written on the pedestal, which is 
crossed by the following part of the founder's legend: — WyJce- 
ham, turned the wrong side upwards. The figure is that of an 
aged man, wearing a green cap, gloves, an alb, and a russet 
mantle over it. The niche tapestry is powdered with letters S 
and letters A, crowned. 

The tracery lights of this window, A to F inclusive, are each 
filled with a canopy, under which stands an angel. Cherubim is 
written upon a small scroll at the foot of each canopy in the 
lights A and B. The smaller tracery lights are filled with 
foliage and monsters. 


This is likewise a figure and canopy window. 

No. 1 light. On the pedestal is written Maria Egipcaca. 
The figure is that of a female. The niche tapestry is powdered 
with letters M, crowned. 

No. 2. Sea Martha is written on the pedestal. The figure is 
that of a female. The niche tapestry is powdered with letters M, 

No. 3. This light is a good deal mutilated. The pedestal is 
inscribed Maria: Jacob i, and the lower part of the niche tapestry 
is powdered with letters M, crowned. But the figure itself is 
that of a prophet, holding a scroll like the figures in the north 
windows, inscribed visitabo oves meas $ liberabo ea[s\. (See Ezekiel 


xxxiv. 12.) The remainder of the niche tapestry is powdered 
with letters E, crowned. 

No. 4. This light is also much mutilated. The upper part of 
the figure is that of a Queen, and the niche tapestry is powdered 
with letters W, crowned. The lower part of the figure belongs 
to a different subject. The pedestal is inscribed Ses Cuthberf, 
and is crossed by the following part of the founder's legend — 
Orate v Willmo ; from which I conclude that this part of the 
design belonged originally to a lower tier light of some window. 

No. 5. Scs is written on the pedestal. The figure is that 

of a Bishop. The niche tapestry is powdered with letters B, 
crowned. A portion of the founder's legend, now missing, 
crossed the pedestal. 

No. 6. Scs Bri is written on the pedestal. The 

figure is, however, that of a female. The niche tapestry is 
powdered with letters C and letters B, crowned. A portion of 
the founder's legend, now missing, crossed the pedestal. 

No. 7. The figure is that of a female. The niche tapestry is 
powdered with letters E, crowned. A portion of the founder's 
legend, now missing, crossed the pedestal. 

No. 8. The figure is that of a Queen. The niche tapestry is 
powdered with letters E, crowned. A portion of the founder's 
legend, now missing, crossed the pedestal. 

The tracery lights of this window, A to F inclusive, are each 
filled with a canopy, under which stands an angel. Seraphim is 
written upon a small scroll at the foot of each canopy in the 
lights A and B. The smaller tracery lights are filled with 
foliage and monsters, as in the other windows. 

The present seems the most convenient place for offering a 
few remarks on the date, style, and general effect of the oldest 
or original glazing of the chapel. 

In the absence of any direct information, we can arrive only 
at an approximation to the date of this glass. That it was 
erected in Wykeham's lifetime may be inferred, if not even from 
the style of the legend which runs across the windows, and con- 
tains the expression "Orate pro Willelmo de Wykeham," at 
least from the fact of New College having been the first of 
Wykeham's three great works, and the silence of his will re- 
specting its fabric; a will which, as is well known, contains 
minute directions for the glazing of a part of Winchester 
Cathedral. Indeed, the somewhat earlier character of the glass 
as compared with the windows of Winchester College Chapel, 
which have been copied faithfully, as it would seem, from the 



original glazing of that edifice, would justify the supposition that 
it was erected before the commencement of Winchester College, 
in 1387. On the whole, I think we shall not be far wrong in 
concluding that the windows of New College were glazed between 
the founding of the establishment in 1379, and its being taken 
possession of by the first warden and fellows in 1386, at which 
time we have reason to believe that the Chapel and Hall were 
completed, and, if so, that the windows were glazed, for it is 
true, as a general rule, that in mediaeval times the glaziers com- 
menced operations as soon as any part of a building was ready 
to receive the glass. 

The glass, though Perpendicular in its general character, and 
therefore to be regarded as one of the earliest, if not the earliest, 
exponent of that style, displays, as might be expected, many 
Decorated features, as in the design of some of the canopies, 
especially as exemplified in the square tower over the niche 
arch, from which the spire of the canopy rises; and even in 
the pedestals used in the lower tier of lights, which, with the 
small rayonnated sun on each side, bear considerable resemblance 
to the pedestals of the early Decorated canopies in the Lady 
Chapel windows of Wells Cathedral — in the coloured moulding 
sometimes occurring under the battlements of the tower — in the 
coloured windows of the spire — in the pot-metal yellow finials 
occasionally employed — in the shape of the crockets — in the use 
of flesh-coloured glass to represent the nude parts of several of 
the principal figures — in the white hair and beards, leaded into 
pink faces, &c. Yet these, and many other Decorated features, 
which a practised eye will not fail to detect, are, as it were, 
merged in the general character of the later style, which displays 
itself in the broad colouring of the windows, — in the general 
flatness of the composition, which, by the way, is more remark- 
able in the north, south, and west windows of the antechapel 
than in the east windows, where the canopy spires are cut out 
and surrounded with colour more completely, a circumstance 
which once induced me to think that these canopies were of 
earlier date than the rest, — in the preponderance of white and 
yellow stained glass over the pot-metal colours, — and, though in 
a less prominent degree, in the attitudes and draperies of most 
of the figures, particularly those in the north, south, and west 
windows — in the drawing, especially of the heads — in the thin- 
ness of the black outlines — in the general softness and delicacy 
of the execution, &c. Smear-shading is occasionally used in the 
canopy- work, but the shadows are generally executed, if I mistake 


not, in "Smear-shading stippled," an invention of the early part 
of the fourteenth century, and which differs from " Stipple- 
shading" (the mode commonly adopted in the fifteenth century) 
in this, that the lights are left clear in the first instance, instead 
of being picked out of a stippled ground of Enamel Brown, 
spread uniformly over the glass. The granulation and depth of 
the shading are perhaps best shown in the white robe of Eve in 
the northernmost west window ; but, even in tins instance, the 
shadow is not very coarsely stippled, nor can it be called deep 
even in its deepest part. There is no instance, in any of the 
windows, of the practice, adopted with such effect in later times, 
of making the accidental varieties of depth common in a sheet 
of coloured glass correspond in position with the lights and 
shades of the picture ; and, though many parts of the composi- 
tion are strongly contrasted in colour to others, yet this is not 
sufficient to supply the want of deeper shadows and more 
decided outlines, and secure the distinctness of the design, or 
save the painting from the imputation of being little else than a 
congeries of flat spots of white and coloured glass. 

When, in addition to this defect, the imperfection of the figure 
drawing 1 and want of proper perspective in the canopies are 
brought to mind, we are tempted to inquire what is it that 
renders these windows so beautiful, so infinitely more agreeable 
than those of modern times. It cannot be their discoloration, 
for modern windows that have been as much discoloured fail to 
please. The secret lies in the fine tone and harmony of their 
colouring ; and, perhaps I may venture to add, in its perfect 
keeping with the architectural character of the building. There 
is not a harsh or discordant hue anywhere. The whole colouring 

1 Should it be objected that most of the box ; or Samson slaying the Lion, 
these figures possess a certain degree by a clown who, with much grimace 
of sublimity, I would respectfully warn and affected violence, caresses the royal 
my readers of the danger there is of beast — as in his brother's windows at 
engendering a false taste by recurring Christ Church, Oxford, and the late Ex- 
to such models for sublimity. Nothing hibition ; or, I may add, than the cat's- 
is more true than that from the sub- eyed saints of Messrs. Pugin and Hard- 
lime to the ridiculous there is but a man ? Enthusiastic amateurs should 
step. What can be more absurd, for recollect that they tolerate such things 
instance, than the mode of representing at the risk of being laughed at by the 
the Passage of the Eed Sea by a caper- very persons they employ. Work of 
ing figure betwixt two cauliflowers; or this description is even now nick-named, 
the Plagues of Egypt by so many car- in derision, bogie-work by the glaziers' 
cases, frogs and fish, &c, sprawling in a men. If sublimity is aimed at, we may 
plate — as in the late M. Gereute's win- be sure it will not be reached simply 
dow at Ely ; or the Raising of Lazarus, by rectifying the more palpable anato- 
by a mummy jumping up like Jack-in- mical faults of the mediaeval artists. 

L 2 



is equally quiet and subdued, and is in entire agreement with 
the silvery grey of the white glass. It is without doubt to the 
excellent tone of the latter material that this satisfactory result 
is owing. For this same white glass, which has no modern 
representative, 1 forms the base of all the coloured glasses, and 

1 As I still meet with occasional as- 
sertions to the contrary, I think it is as 
well to repeat what I have constantly 
stated, that modern glass differs from 
old both in tone, colour, and texture, 
and this more widely in proportion to 
the difference of date ; the nearest 
resemblance, though by no means an 
exact one, being between modern glass 
and that of the sixteenth century, and 
the greateat difference being between it 
and the glass of the twelfth, thirteenth, 
and fourteenth centuries ; and further, 
that the attempts hitherto made to dis- 
guise this difference have completely 
failed. I am able to make this asser- 
tion more positively, since it is borne 
out by certain chemical experiments 
which I have caused to be instituted 
during the last two years, the result of 
which I hope, ere long, to make known 
through the medium of this Journal. 
I, of course, should not be expected to 
notice any opinion of the writers in the 
' Ecclesiologist' on a subject of this kind ; 
nor should I now allude to them, if it 
were not to guai'd those who may be as 
inexperienced or as careless observers 
as themselves from the danger of being 
misled by the misrepresentation of a 
matter of fact which occurs in the fol- 
lowing passage: — '"Mr. Winston re- 
minds us that ' no cleaning is able to 
deprive ancient glass, of a certain date, 
of its tone, richness, and general ap- 
pearance.' This we entirely deny. The 
east window of Bristol, which is of middle- 
pointed date, has been lately cleaned, 
and it is neither better nor worse than 
Messrs. Wailes, or O'Connor, or Wille- 
ment would produce. Rich is just what 
it is not," &c. &c. It unfortunately 
happens that about two-thirds of the 
Bristol window consists of modern glass. 
But the appeal to it is not useless, as it 
serves to show that an ability to distin- 
guish modern from ancient glass is not 
a necessary qualification for an adept in 

the mysteries of ecclesiology. Of the 
various expedients resorted to for imi- 
tating the effect of the ancient material, 
Messrs. Powell's and Messrs. Hartley's 
processes for roughening the surfaces 
of the glass are the most successful, 
though but expedients after all. " An- 
tiquating the glass," i. e. dulling it 
with enamel colour in imitation of dirt 
and the rust of age, is commonly re- 
sorted to as a means of destroying the 
perfect pellucidness of the modern ma- 
terial : a quality resulting from refine- 
ments in the manufacture. Instead, 
however, of making the glass look thick 
and rich like the old, it only makes 
it dull and heavy in effect : nor does it 
materially improve its tone of colour. 
Of three imitations of ancient glass in 
the late Exhibition, which I particularly 
examined, one by M. Lusson, which 
had been the most antiquated, was the 
least watery in effect. The second, by 
M. Gerente, which also had been anti- 
quated, though in a less degree, was, in 
proportion, more flimsy. The last, by 
Messrs. Pugin and Hardman, which had 
not been antiquated at all, was the most 
flimsy and watery. But they were all 
infei'ior to ancient glass in richness, 
depth, and particularly in tone of 
colour ; as was indeed easily shown by 
holding clear pieces of ancient glass 
beside them. M. Lusson's, on the whole, 
was decidedly the best imitation, but 
this was not owing to the greater anti- 
quating of the glass. I am surprised 
that the eyes of the public are not yet 
open to the absurdity of literally copy- 
ing designs of an early period in a mate- 
rial so different from that in which such 
designs were originally worked, and 
with reference to which we may sup- 
pose they were made. We might as 
well expect a literal copy, in wood, of 
a stone spire, or of a wooden spire in 
stone, to produce a satisfactory effect. 


consequently imparts to them its own hue ; of the actual depth 
and greenness of which we are not aware so long as the white is 
intermixed with cool blues, reds, purples, and apparently though 
not really faded greens, as in the antechapel windows; but 
which surprises us when fully brought out by contrast with a 
warmer scale of colouring, as will hereafter be shown to be done 
in some of the south windows of the nave. Without expecting 
a ready acquiescence in the opinion hazarded, that a part of the 
pleasure excited by the colouring of these windows arises from a 
perception of its harmony with the architectural character of the 
building, I cannot but think that the idea is less fanciful than 
may at first appear. There is a gloominess in the style of 
Gothic ecclesiastical architecture which is very much opposed, 
not indeed to rich, but to warm and gay colouring. And though 
this gloominess in the present instance is, to a certain extent, 
disguised by the elegance of the modern fittings, and the warmth 
of the yellow wash with which the walls of the antechapel and 
choir are covered, it still exists, and grows upon the eye in pro- 
portion as the building is contemplated ; and the more fully the 
gloominess of the architecture is perceived, the less striking does 
the cold colouring of the antechapel windows appear, until at 
last it seems more appropriate to the place than the warmer and 
gayer colouring of the windows of the choir. 

I now proceed to give a short account of the glass in the 
choir windows, beginning with the first window from the east, 
on the south side. 

The tradition is, that all the glass in the south windows is 
Flemish, and the work of Eubens' scholars. 1 But this does not 
appear to be altogether correct. A great many of the figures in 
the lower lights are, it is true, the work of foreign artists, and, 
in the absence of any certain information, I am inclined to think 
of the Flemish school, in the latter part of the sixteenth, or early 
part of the seventeenth century. But the whole of the canopy- 
work, which is evidently copied from glass of similar design to 
that in the antechapel, is, except those portions of it that 
actually are of Wykeham's time, of comparatively a recent 
date ; at which period the rest of the large figures appear to 
have been painted, some of the old ones supplied with heads, 

1 Gutch, in a note to Wood's ' History Flemish, done, as is reported, from de- 

of the Colleges and Halls of Oxford,' signs given by some scholars of Rubens, 

p. 199, says the windows on the south and were purchased, by the Bociety, of 

side of the chapel were originally Win. Price, who repaired them in 1740. 


and almost the whole of the old glass, not only the Flemish, but 
the remains of the original glazing in the tracery lights, as well 
as in the lower lights, retouched. Coupling these facts with the 
inscription at the bottom of the last window from the east, which 
records the fact that W. Price repaired these windows in 1740, 
I can come to no other conclusion than that the greater part of 
the glazing is the work of Price, who adapted the Flemish 
figures to the lights. 


All the figures in the lower lights of this window appear to 
have been painted by Price. Some represent Bishops, Arch- 
bishops, and a Pope, but no names are given. Some are 
canonised saints. Five of the crozier-heads, and a great part 
of the canopy-hoods, 1 are of the same date as the ancient glass in 
the antechapel. The glass of which these remains are com- 
posed, which in the antechapel would seem to be white, here 
appears to be a positive dark green, from contrast with the 
warm colours that surround it, and particularly from its being 
opposed to the warm grey or light sky-blue used as a spire-back 
to the canopies. The founder's legend, in modern glass, is 
carried along the bottom of this, as well as of the other south 

The execution of the painting is very heavy. There are 
scarcely any clear lights. 2 The shadows are not stippled, but 

1 It is not easy to conceive what as in the windows of the antechapel, 

motive could have induced Price to were wont to make both figures and 

work up any part of the ancient mate- canopies equally, or almost equally, flat. 

rials. In reshading the old canopy- After all, the fault rests with the ama- 

hoods, so as to make them harmonize teurs, without whose countenance such 

with the powerfully-shaded figures be- extravagances could not be committed, 

neath, he has however shown himself a 2 It is difficult, no doubt, to prescribe 

better artist than the majority of the the extent to which, in painting glass, 

modern imitators of ancient glass, who the material may be obscured, or the 

seldom scruple to clap a deeply-shaded high lights subdued with enamel colour, 

figure below, it cannot be said beneath, without violating the fundamental con- 

a canopy as flat in effect as the material ditions of this branch of art : and I 

on which it is painted actually is. This would recommend any one, who really 

defect might be observed in many of feels an interest in the subject, to sus- 

the specimens in the late Exhibition, pend his judgment until he has had 

It seems to result from a habit of copy- an opportunity of actually examining 

ing the figures from ancient MSS., and and comparing a variety of painted 

the canopies from ancient painted glass, windows. Without, however, attempt- 

For if both were alike copied from old ing to lay down any rule, I think I 

windows, our imitators could hardly may venture to say, that if a picture in 

fail to observe that the mediaeval artists, painted glass appears to be, on the 


hatched, as in an oil-painting; and, besides being always muddy, 
are frequently too deep. The shade of the interior of the 
canopy niche is absolutely black. The colouring is in general 
raw. The blue is of an unpleasant purple hue, but the ruby, as 
is not uncommonly the case in Price's works, is as scarlet as that 
of the fifteenth century, but of a rawer tone, through being made 
on a purer white base. Enamel blue is employed in some of the 
draperies and smaller ornaments, and a red enamel, like china- 
red, for the flesh-colour, but in general pot-metal colours are 
used. It is to this circumstance principally that the superior 
effect of the south, as compared with the north windows of the 
nave, is owing. 

The tracery lights are of the same design as those of the ante- 
chapel windows. A figure and canopy occupies each from A to 
F inclusive, and various ornaments the smaller lights. The 
figures are of Price's time, but parts of the original glazing occur 
in the canopies, and in the smaller lights. The word cherubyn, 
at the bottom of the canopies A and B, is in each instance on an 
ancient piece of glass. 


I am inclined to think that all the figures in the lower lights 
of this window, and certainly that all their heads, are Price's. 
A Bishop and a Cardinal are represented, as well as ordinary 

whole, as brilliant and transparent as one hand, the opinion of most modern 
an equal extent of plain glazing of the artists, that a glass-painting ought to 
same date as itself, we may be sure that be a dull transparency — as exemplified, 
the obscuration of the material has not for instance, in the windows of St. Ger- 
been carried too far ; and if, in addi- main l'Auxerrois, Paris ; and, as may 
tion, when considered with reference to be recollected, in the majority of the 
its design, it betrays no incompleteness works sent to the late Exhibition ; — on 
of effect, we may be satisfied that the the other hand, the abortive attempts 
obscuration of the material has been of modern imitators of old glass to re- 
carried quite far enough, a standard present canopy-hoods, and other pro- 
which by no means excludes all but jecting work, landscapes, &e., without 
picture glass-paintings executed in an the aid of shadows, linear or aerial per- 
absolutely flat manner ; since it is com- spective, as shown, on the whole perhaps 
pletely attained by any good specimen most consistently, in the glass-paintings 
of the period between 1 530 and 1 540, of Messrs. Pugin and Hardman ; leav- 
though adequately representing canopy- ing, as a matter entirely irrespective 
work, or even the interior of a building, of the question at issue, the choice 
as by the flattest Gothic picture: whilst whether of a flat, but artistic, or more 
many a modern glass-painting, of the rotund manner of representation, to be 
flattest possible design, such as an orna- determined by the good taste of the 
mental pattern, will be found to fall artist and the nature of the subject, 
below it. It equally condemns, on the 


saints, but no names are given. Three of the crozier-heads, and 
large portions of the canopy-work, are of Wykeham's time. The 
glass of which they are composed, as in the former window, looks 
perfectly green. The tracery lights are of the same general 
design as the last. A good deal of the canopy-work, &c, and 
the whole of one or two of the figures, which are simply angels, 
are original, as is the word Dnacdes, which is written under each 
of the canopies A and B. The old blue tapestry-ground is 
retained in one of the lights. This appears quite cold and 
greenish in hue, on comparison with the glass in the lower 


Price seems to have painted the figures in the upper tier of 
lower lights, at all events, if not some of those in the lower tier. 
He has retouched them all. Amongst them are represented 
Bishops, Patriarchs, and three female figures. One of the 
crozier-heads is of "Wykeham's time, and there are some original 
pieces in the canopy-hoods. All the angels in the tracery lights 
are Price's work. There are fragments of the original glazing in 
the canopies and in the smaller lights, and the original inscrip- 
tion Sei-aphyn remains in the lights A and B. The figures are 
those of angels. 


The figures represented in the lower lights are a Pope, an 
Archbishop, St. John the Evangelist, another male saint, St. 
Catherine, and three female saints. The heads of three of the 
male figures are by Price, and St. Catherine's head is a copy of 
the head in light No. 5 of the next window; but, with these 
exceptions, the figures appear to be of Flemish workmanship. 

Parts of the angels in the tracery lights are original, but have 
been retouched. The original inscription, Troni, appears in the 
lights A and B. Some of the blue niche tapestry is old, and 
appears very cold in comparison with the modern blue. The 
smaller tracery lights are original. 


Amongst the figures represented in the lower lights are a 
Pope, two Kings, a Bishop, and three female saints, one of whom 
holds a cross, another a sword. These appear to be Flemish, 


and are more artistical than Price's. The male heads are entirely- 
free from that vulgar air which is so lamentable in his work ; 
they are also less wrinkled, and more fleshy. The female heads 
are delicate and pleasing, but, like the male heads, have too 
much an air of prettiness to suit the character of a monumental 
work. In point of execution, the work resembles Price's : about 
the same proportion of enamel colouring is used, and the same 
mode of shading is adopted ; but the shadows are more delicate 
than his, and the colouring of the draperies is better in tone. 
At the bottom of the light No. 8 is the inscription before referred 
to — W. Price has fenestras reparavit, Ao. Dni. 1740. 

Most of the figures in the tracery lights (simple angels) are 
original, but have been retouched. The greater part of the 
canopy-work is also original; and the original inscription, Prin- 
cipal, remains at the bottom of the lights A and B. 

The north windows x will not require a detailed notice of any 
but the tracery lights, in which alone any part of the original 
glazing is preserved. It appears, from an inscription in the first 
window from the east, that the glass in the lower lights was 
painted by W. Peckitt, in 1765; and certainly one cannot but 
perceive how much the art of glass-painting had deteriorated 
since the days of Price. The general design is the same as that 
of the south windows. A figure under a canopy occupies each 
light ; but the figures are poorly drawn, and the canopies are 
weakly designed, except the bases of those in the lower tier of 
lights, which, with the founder's legend that crosses them, are 
copied from the old ones in the antechapel. Their enamel blue 
spire-ground produces a flimsy effect, and the colouring of the 
windows generally is inferior to that of the south windows. 
Some pot-metal, and much enamel-coloured glass, is used in the 
draperies; as well as stained red, and some bad, heavy-tinted, 
streaky ruby, much resembling the ruby used by Peckitt in the 
east window of Lincoln Cathedral, which was painted by him in 
1762. The shading is muddy, there are no clear lights, and the 
deep shadows are quite black. Our Saviour, the Virgin Mary, 
the Twelve Apostles, St. Paul, and St. Barnabas, are represented 

1 The following account of these win- Old Testament, from Adam to Moses ; 

dows is given by Gutch, in a note to in the upper, twelve of the prophets. 

Wood, p. 199: "The windows on the Mr. Rebecca gave the designs for these, 

north side, done' by Mr. Peckitt, of In the two other windows are our 

York, in 1765 and 1774. The three Saviour, the Virgin Mary, and the 

nearest the screen contain in the lower Twelve Apostles." 
range the chief persons recorded in the 


in the two first windows from the east; and a series of prophets, 
patriarchs, and worthies, ending with Adam and Eve, in the 
other windows. Under the figure of the Virgin, in the second 
window from the east, is the following coat: — Argent, on a 
chevron, sable, three quatrefoils, or; and on a scroll beneath is 
written, Johannes Eyre, Arm., Hujus Hosp. Soc. 


The glass in these lights is original. A female figure holding 
a lamp, under a canopy, occupies each of the lights A to F 
inclusive. Vir gines is written across the base of each of the 
canopies A and B. In the smaller tracery lights are monsters, 
or foliaged ornaments, as in the antechapel windows. 


The glazing in the tracery lights of this window is also 
original. An angel under a canopy fills each of the lights A to 
F inclusive. At the foot of A and B respectively is written 
Angeli. The smaller lights are ornamented in the same way as 
those of the last window. 


The glazing of the tracery lights of this window is likewise 
original. An angel under a canopy is represented in each of 
the lights A to F inclusive ; and at the foot of A and B respec- 
tively is written Arehangeli. The smaller tracery lights are 
ornamented as before. 


The glazing of the tracery lights of this window is also 
original. An angel completely armed in plate, or euir bouilli, 
but bare-headed, holding a battle-axe in his left hand, and a 
spear, with a square pennon bearing a plain cross, in his right, 
under a canopy, is represented in the lights A to F inclusive. 
The following is written, one half in light A, the other half in 
light B : Vir tutes. By some mistake the halves have been 
transposed in the window. 


The glass in the tracery lights of this window is also original. 
In each of the lights A to F inclusive, is a canopy, under which 


is an angel, with legs and arms entirely enclosed in plate, or 
cuir boailli; wearing a jupon and sword-belt, a tippet of ermine 
round his neck, and a sort of fur cap on his head. He holds a 
long baton in his left hand. In some of the examples the baton 
has a short spike at the top, like that usually represented at the 
butt end of a staff. At the bottom of lights A and B respec- 
tively is written Potestates. 

In noticing the great west window of the antechapel, 1 it is 
not my intention to enlarge on its defects. These have been 
pithily summed up by a distinguished artist, 2 to whom I refer 
the reader. I fully admit their existence, and regard this work 
as a great misapplication of art. Its most unfortunate effect has 
been to produce an unfounded prejudice against the application 
of art to glass-painting, and occasion a revulsion of feeling among 
amateurs. Every one has felt the justice of Horace Walpole's 
sneer at the washy Virtues of Sir Joshua : but, it cannot be denied, 
on the opposite side, that the tendency of the present age to 
dispense with all artistic qualities in the pursuit of windows 
which shall display an abundance of strong and gaudy colouring, 
is an error leading to still more pernicious consequences. It is 
true that certain writers who follow the popular delusion 3 occa- 
sionally, and, to save appearances, talk about the necessity for a 
display of art in painted windows, but, on examining the examples 
they indicate as models, we perceive that a display of very low 
art indeed is sufficient to satisfy their demands. Leaving, then, 
these blind guides, let us recollect that, though our climate and 
habits may forbid the employment of fresco-painting to any 
great extent, yet that there exists in our windows as favourable 
a field for artistic development, though subject to different con- 
ditions, as in an equal breadth of wall ; that ancient windows, 
except in the case of mere restorations, are worthy of being 

1 Gutch, in a note to Wood, p. 199, little green pot-metal glass is used in 

states that " for this work, which was this group. The rest of the painting is 

begun about the year 1777, finished car- executed with enamel colours and stains, 

toons were furnished by Sir Joshua Some of the lower figures have a pearly 

Reynolds, and tben were copied by Mr. effect ; but they are not sufficiently 

Jervais." I recollect seeing Sir Joshua's separated from the ground of the 

original sketch some years ago at the window, either by colour or by shadow. 

British Institution. It was richly 2 In the Winchester volume of the 

coloured. The subject consists of the Proceedings of the Archaeological Insti- 

Adoration of the Shepherds, in the tute, " William of Wykeham," p. 30. 

lights of the upper tier ; with a single 3 See, amongst others, the ' Eccle- 

figure occupying each light of the lower siologist,' and ' Morning Chronicle,' 

tier, except the centre one, which con- passim. 
tains a group representing Charity. A 


copied only so far as regards the composition and colour of their 
material ; and. that, so long as we are content to see produced 
year after year windows immeasurably inferior in all respects to 
the works of foreign artists (works, by the way, far from being 
perfect models themselves, — as, for instance, the window lately 
erected at Brussels Cathedral, by Capronnier ; those at Cologne 
or Munich ; or the specimens sent to the late Exhibition, 1 by 
Capronnier, Bertini, and others), so long may Ave expect in vain 
any improvement in the art to take place. 

The painted glass in the Hall windows, of which there are 
three on the south and four on the north side — the hall running 
in the same line as the chapel — consists of coats of arms exclu- 
sively. The following shields are of the same date as the 
original glazing in the chapel. 

In the third window from the east on the north side — Argent, 
between two chevrons sable, three roses or. — William of Wykeham. 
The shield is of the transitional character which prevailed on the 
confines of the Perpendicular style. The diaper closely resembles 
some ornament of similar date in the first window from the east, 
of the north chancel aisle, St. Thomas's Church, Salisbury. 
Eacli of the roses (which are turned the wrong side outwards) 
has a yellow centre, formed by grinding away the coloured 
surface of the ruby, here thin and smooth, and staining the 
white glass yellow. This is the earliest instance that I have 
yet met with of the practice. 

Azure, a sivord and key saltier wise, argent, in chief; a mitre of 
the second. — The ancient arms of the See of Winchester. See 
the seal of William of Waynflete, engraved in his Life by 

1 It is unfortunate that the oppor- et critique des Verres, Vitraux, Cristaux, 
tuuity so fairly offered of leading the eomposant la Classe XXIV. de l'Expo- 
public taste in a right direction by the sition univei-selle de 1851 ' (Weale), 
award of the Fine Arts (No. XXX.) very naturally expresses himself at a 
Jury, on the painted-glass in the late loss to discover on what principle the 
Exhibition, has been so completely prizes were adjusted. [See p. 41, note; 
thrown away. The worthlessness of the see also p. 52, note.] Most of my 
award must be evident to any one who readers are aware that M. Bontemps has 
really examined the specimens. It is, had great experience in painted glass 
however, not singular that the work during upwards of thirty years, and 
of Capronnier did not only receive no that he was elected an assessor of the 
prize, but was not even considered Jury XXIV. Section B of the above- 
worthy of mention, by judges who dis- mentioned pamphlet contains very just, 
covered so much merit in the works though perhaps occasionally too good- 
exhibited by G-e'rente, Pugin and Hard- natured criticisms on the glass-paintings 
man, Howe, Wailes, and O'Connor. M. that were exhibited. 
Bontemps, -in his ' Examen historique 


Chandler. The same bearing occurs in one of the windows 
of the choir clearstory of Winchester Cathedral. This building 
is dedicated to St. Peter and St. Paul, from whose emblems the 
coat is principally composed. 

In the second window from the east, on the north side — 
Argent, a cross gules. St. George. 

Quarterly, 1st and 4th. Azure, semi de lis, or. 

2nd and 3rd. Gules, three lions passant guardant in pale, or. — 
King Richard II. 

In the first window from the east, on the south side — Gules, 
three crowns in pale, or. This coat has been assigned to several 
imaginary personages, as, for instance, the King of Crekeland. 
The panel surrounding the shield is coeval with it. It is not 
improbable that the other shields were originally surrounded 
with similar panels, and that these were inserted in lights 
having ornamental borders, and a ground of ornamental quarries. 
The ruby of the field is thin and smooth on the sheet, as, 
indeed, is all that in the antechapel windows. The border of 
the panel is shaded with smear-shading, stippled. 

The remaining coats are of the time of Henry "VIII. Some 
are fine examples of the period. 

In the first window from the east, on the south side — Argent, 
on a chevron gules, betiveen three pellets, a cock of the first. Over a 
fillet, vert, a chief of the first, charged with a double rose of the 
second, between two leopards' faces, azure. The shield, which is 
within a wreath, is surmounted by a mitre. — John Longland, 
Bishop of Lincoln from 1520 to 1547. 

In the second window from the east, on the south side — Party 
per f ess or, and gules; a demi-rose and demi-sun conjoined, counter- 
changed of the field. Issuant from the demi-rose is the neck of a 
double-headed eagle sable, and from each side of the rose issues an 
eagle's wing displayed, of the last. The shield is within a 
wreath much mutilated. It was originally surmounted by a 
Cardinal's hat, of which only the strings remain. Wood declares 
that these arms were given by the Emperor Maximilian to 
William Knight, a Fellow of the College; Gutch adds, by 
letters patent, dated 20th July, 1514; and that he was made 
Bishop of Bath and Wells in 1541. It is difficult to reconcile 
the existence of the Cardinal's hat with this statement, except 
on the supposition that it formed part of the original grant of 

Quarterly, 1st. Argent, a pelican in a nest, feeding her young 
ones, vert. 


2nd and 3rd. Argent, a lion rampant, vert. 

4th. Argent, an eagle displayed, vert. — Robert Sherburne, 
Bishop of Chichester from 1508 to 1536. The first quarter of 
the arms is much mutilated. 

In the third window from the east, on the south side — The 
arms of Edward Prince of Wales (afterwards King Edward VI.), 
within a wreath, and surmounted by a coronet. The second and 
third quarters are lost. 

Azure, on a cross, or, between four griffins' heads erased, argent, 
a rose gules. The shield is within a garter, and is surmounted 
by a mitre. — Stephen Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester from 
1531 to 1550, and from 1553 to 1555. 

In the fourth window from the east, on the north side — Azure, 
an episcopal staff, or, surmounted by a pall argent, charged with 
four crosses pate' fitchS, sable : impaling gules, a fess, or ; in chief, 
a goafs head argent; in base, three escallops of the last. — William 
Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury from 1504 to 1532. The 
arms are within a wreath, and surmounted by a mitre. 

The arms of King Henry VIII., supported by a red dragon 
and white greyhound. 

The complicated charges and high finish of these coats, as well 
as the delicate texture of their material, contrast strongly with 
the more simple and more boldly executed shields of the time of 

Other arms, mentioned by Wood in his 'History of the 
Colleges and Halls of Oxford,' have disappeared. 


(From the Archaeological Journal, vol. ix. p. 120.) 

It has occurred to me, in reference to the memoir on the painted 
glass in New College Chapel and Hall, Oxford, that I may assist 
the researches of others by mentioning that there are eleven species 
of original canopies existing in the lower lights of the windows of 
the antechapel, and of the south windows of the choir; and by 
showing their present arrangement by the following diagrams, in 
which each species of canopy is indicated by Eoman numerals. 
From these diagrams, and the foregoing paper, it will appear that 
the arrangement of the glass is more perfect, and most to be relied 
on as original, in the northernmost west window of the ante- 

C. W. 



Northernmost West Win- 
dow of the Antechapel. 

First North Window of 
the Antechapel from 
the West. 

Second North Window of 
the Antechapel from 
the Wt.'.st. 








V V 










South Window of the Southernmost of the Win- Northernmost East Window of 
Antechapel. do ws of the Antechapel. the Antechapel. 




































First, Second, and Third Fourth and Fifth South 
Southernmost East Window of South Windows of the Windows of the Choir 

the Antechapel. Choir from the East. from the East. 





























(From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at 
Bristol, 1851.) 

Y principal object in writing this Paper is to call 
attention to the remains of painted glass in 
Bristol Cathedral and the Mayor's Chapel ; but 
as Wells, Gloucester, and Exeter Cathedrals 
are easy of access from Bristol, and contain 
many interesting specimens of painted glass, I 
have been induced to include in this sketch a 
short notice of the remains existing in those edi- 
fices, in the hope that it may prove useful to such persons as 
are inclined to pursue the subject further. I do not pretend to 
do more than call attention to these interesting specimens ; to 
examine them at length would occupy too much time ; and, I 
should add, that, not having visited Bristol and Exeter since 
1849, Wells since 1848, and Gloucester since 1846, the remarks 
I am about to offer must be taken as applicable to the state 
of the glass at those periods respectively. 

I propose to notice: — 1st, the Bristol glass; 2ndly, the Wells; 
3rdly, the Gloucester; and, lastly, the Exeter. 

The first window that claims our attention is the east window 
of Bristol Cathedral. In 1847 it underwent a judicious restora- 
tion, in course of which the encrusted dirt was removed, which 
obsnured the glass, and rendered the more delicate ornaments 
invisible, such as the diaper patterns in the arms and the border 
of the window. The ancient glass was scrupulously retained, 
and modern used only to supply actual deficiencies ; so that this 
window has lost nothing of its interest by being restored. 

A great deal of modern glass was necessarily employed in the 
lower lights, and in the three upright lights in the upper part of 
the window, the design of the modern glass being taken, as much 
as possible, from the original fragments now worked up in those 
lights, and from the slight sketch given of the window in Lyson's 


' Gloucestershire.' ! The remainder of the window, however, is 
filled with the original glazing. The old work, throughout, may 
be easily distinguished from the new, by the different texture of 
the glass. 

The window represents a stem of Jesse. The lower lights 
contain figures of the Virgin and Infant Jesus, as well as prophets 
and kings ; in several of which figures portions of the original 
glazing may be observed. Each figure is enclosed in an oval 
panel, formed by the ramifications of a vine branch. Some of 
the foliaged scrolls in the heads of the lower lights (which are 
principally original) 2 are remarkably graceful in design. The 
ancient ruby ground of the scrolls is enriched by the unusual 
addition of a diaper pattern. Diaper patterns, indeed, are used 
with remarkable profusion in this window, and, being executed 
with uncommon boldness, are exceedingly effective. The figures 
and scrolls again present themselves in the three upright lights 
in the upper part of the window, in the centre one of which is 
represented the crucified Saviour, and in the two others the 
Blessed Virgin and St. John the Evangelist ; original parts of all 
these figures remain. 

The design of the glass in the tracery lights is made to har- 
monise completely with that of the lower lights, by the introduc- 
tion, by way of ornament, of scrolls of foliage into the principal 
openings. The heads of Prophets, or Patriarchs, are even 
inserted in the middle of eight of the smaller tracery lights : 
these heads are the only part of the design which cannot be 
easily made out from the floor of the choir. The black letter 
monogram, $ ?£ C, in one of the spandrels, should be noticed as 
being evidently an insertion; it is painted on later glass than 
the rest. In the upper tracery lights is a display of heraldry, of 
singular excellence, by the aid of which we may, perhaps, venture 
to refer the date of the glass to the latter part of the reign of 
Edward II. 

The absence of Gaveston's arms from the window proves, I 
think, conclusively, that the glass was put up after the murder 
of that favourite in 1312 ; and the presence of the Earl of Here- 
ford's arms appears to afford some evidence that the glass was 
put up before 1322, in which year Humphrey de Bohun, Earl of 
Hereford, was slain in open rebellion against bis sovereign. At 
all events, I think it clear that the glass was put up before the 

1 See Lyson's ' Gloucestershire,' plate xcii. 

2 One is given in Lyson's ' Gloucestershire,' plate xciii. 



ascendancy of Mortimer, Queen Isabella's favourite ; for not only 
are his arms omitted, but those of two of his victims are present: 
viz., of Edmund Fitzalan, Earl of Arundel, who was put to death 
in 1326 ; and of Le Despencer, or Spencer, who also perished in 
the same, year. The son, having married one of the sisters and 
eventual heiresses of the last Gilbert of Clare, who died in 1314, 
and having become Earl of Gloucester, will sufficiently account 
for the presenee of the Clare coat. 

The royal arms of England — the three lions on a red field — 
of course have allusion to the sovereign ; and the fleurs-de-lis 
border to some of the lights may be well supposed to have 
reference to the French ancestry of Queen Isabella. 

On the whole, I think, there is no objection to assigning the 
year 1320, or thereabouts, as the probable date of the glass in 
the east window. 

The glass in the side windows of the choir will, I fear, require 
a somewhat more detailed description, on account of its mutilated 
and confused condition. 

It will be convenient to mention, first, what I conceive to be 
the remains of the original glazing of these windows ; and to 
begin with the second window from the east on the north side of 
the choir. 

It is evident, I think, that the glass in the tracery lights, and 
in the pierced transom, as well as that composing the Martyrdom 
of St. Sebastian — in the three upper lights — belongs to the 
window ; but I do not think that any of the original glazing of 
the three lower lights remains, except the canopy spires in the 
cuspidated heads of the two outer lights. The occurrence of the 
heraldic border of fleurs-de-lis and lions, in the tracery lights and 
both tiers of lower lights, certainly affords a strong ground for 
thinking that the glazing, which I have designated as original, 
formed part of one and the same window. It is easy, I think, 
to perceive what was the original design of the window when in 
a perfect state. The topmost tracery light, now devoid of 
painted glass, was no doubt ornamented in the same way as the 
two others. Each of the lower lights in both tiers contained a 
canopy ; but whether the canopies in the lower tier of lights 
covered single figures only, or one group of figures, like the 
canopies in the upper tier of lights — as also whether, in either 
tier, the pictures reached down to the bottom of the light, or 
had some ornamental pattern beneath them — rnnst remain 
pretty much a matter of conjecture. The group alluded to, in 
the upper tier of lights, will repay examination. The figure of 


St. Sebastian, pierced with arrows, occupies the centre light. 
An archer, shooting at him with a bow, is conspicuous in the 
eastern light ; and the head of a corresponding archer exists in 
the western light, but is so obscured with dirt as to be scarcely 
visible. Immediately below the figure of St. Sebastian is repre- 
sented a regal person lying asleep, with a dog having one foot 
on his shoulder, and apparently licking his face with its tongue. 
This painting does not seem to have any connexion with the 
legend of St. Sebastian, and was probably brought into such 
close proximity to the Martyrdom in the course of repairs. Can 
it represent the " Story of the king who was rescued, by the 
fidelity of his dogs, from a sedition plotted by his courtiers ; " to 
which story allusion is made, by Mr. Hudson Turner, at p. 262 
of his recently published History of Domestic Architecture ? 

In the next window, the glass of the tracery lights is original; 
and so, I think, are the canopy spires in the two easternmost of 
the lights of the upper tier, and some, if not all, of the canopy 
spires which fill the cuspidated heads of the lights of the lower 
tier. The merchants' marks in the two quatrefoils, and the 
little ornaments in the spandrels under the transom, are un- 
doubtedly in their original position. Of course, nothing further 
can be conjectured respecting the design of the window when 
perfect, than that the lower lights contained figures and canopies, 
with probably an heraldic panel beneath each canopy. It is 
reasonable to suppose that the donor of the window was a 

The remains of original glazing in the first window from the 
east, on the south side, are even more scanty. None of it exists 
above the transom ; but in the quatrefoils below the transom 
are two coats of arms, undoubtedly in their original situation, 
which may be the means, at some future time, of throwing con- 
siderable light on the question of date. One of the shields, that 
in the easternmost quatrefoil, displays, on a white field, a yellow 
chevron, on which three bucks' heads caboshed are depicted, in 
outline ; and therefore are yellow also. 1 This apparently false 
heraldry is ascribable to the by no means uncommon practice, 
especially of the more ancient glass-painters, whenever they 
wished to save themselves trouble, of painting in simple outline 
upon the field, or ordinary, any charge which could only be 
properly represented by leading in a piece of glass of a different 
colour. Had not the field of the coat been argent, I should have 

It is engraved in Lyson's ' Gloucestershire,' plate xciii., fig. 7. 

M 2 


concluded that the chevron was properly coloured or; but in the 
present case the tincture, both of the chevron and its charges, 
is equally left in doubt. I have hitherto been unable to ascer- 
tain the ownership of this coat. Since writing these remarks, I 
have been referred to a Devon family, of the name of " Syrming- 
ton," or " Servington," whose coat — " ermine, on a chevron sable 
(sometimes azure), three bucks' heads caboshed, or" — affords a 
clue to the coat in question. The other shield displays, or, three 
eagles sable — impaling, or rather, dimidiated with, the first- 
named coat. It is possible that this is the coat of Rodney, the 
glass-painter, for convenience sake having represented the purple 
eagles of that coat with enamel brown. I have met with the 
bearing of Castile — argent, a lion rampant purpure — represented 
by a lion painted black, with enamel brown, on a white piece of 
glass. Whatever be the alliance thus indicated, it may, how- 
ever, furnish a clue to the date and presentation of the window. 
The remaining glass belonging to the window is the canopy spires 
which fill the cuspidated heads of three of the lower lights. 

The next window retains none of its original glazing. 

The interpolated glass next demands our attention. The 
most interesting portions of it are the figures of two knights — 
one displaying on his surcoat and shield a white cross on a red 
field ; the other a red cross on a white field. 1 The first-men- 
tioned figure, though divided, and part placed in each of the 
north windows, is, on the whole, in better preservation than the 
other, the only remaining portion of which, consisting of the legs 
and some part of the body, is preserved in one of the south 
windows — the first from the east. But as both figures have 
evidently been painted from the same cartoon, the missing parts 
of the one may readily be supplied from the other. 

The figure in the north window, which alone I shall describe, 
is armed cap-a-pie. with a visored basinet and camail, legs and 
arms in plate, or rather cuir bouilli ; and the body clad in that 
peculiar garment which appears to form the connecting link 
between the surcoat and the jupon, and is called a cyclas — 
having a square piece cut out in front, which exposes to view 
the mail and armour beneath. A shield suspended from the 
neck by a strap, and a lance with a triangular pennon, on which, 
as well as on the shield and cyclas, is represented the white cross 
on the red ground, completes the knight's appointments. The 

1 See the engraving, in Lyson's ' Gloucestershire,' plate xciv. Some mistake 
has been made in colouring this plate. 



Charles Winston, del Philip Delam otte I Vincent Brooks 



whole of the canopy, nuclei- which the figure stands, may be col- 
lected from the four windows, amongst which its parts are distri- 
buted. There can be no doubt that, originally, a panel containing 
a shield intervened between the base of the canopy and the sill 
of the window. Such a panel, with the arms of one of the 
branches of the house of Berkeley, and having a border attached 
of the same pattern as that belonging to the knight's canopy, 
may be seen in the north window next the east. The fragments 
of two other figures — one a Pope, the other a Saint — having 
attached to their canopies a border of the same pattern as that 
attached to the knight's, are scattered about three of the choir 
windows. Thus, reckoning the knight, four subjects, evidently 
belonging to one and the same window, remain. It would be 
inconsistent with what has been said respecting the remains of 
original glazing in the two easternmost of the north and south 
windows, to suppose that these four subjects belonged originally 
to either of those windows. The only alternative is, to suppose 
that they originally belonged to some other windows; as, for 
instance, the second window from the east of the north aisle of 
the choir, the four lower lights of which exactly correspond in 
size and shape with the dimensions of the knight's canopy, and 
of such a panel as I have suggested as having been originally 
placed beneath it. 

There are also, in the easternmost of the north windows of the 
choir, the remains of a knight, bearing the arms of Berkeley of 
Stratton depicted on his surcoat and square banner. This figure is 
larger than any of the four figures already mentioned, and is not 
at present connected with any canopy. Near it is another square 
banner, displaying one quartering of the Despencer coat — gules, 
a fret or; and also the remains of another knight. The arms 
prove, I think, that the glass never belonged to either the 
easternmost north or south window of the choir. It probably 
w r as removed from a window of the nave. The arms of Mortimer, 1 
and many other interesting fragments collected in one of the 
north windows of the choir, seem in like manner to have been 
removed from other windows. 

With regard to the date of the glass originally belonging to 
the side windows, I should not think that it differed from that 
already assigned to the glass of the east window, were it not for 
the heraldic borders of fleurs-de-lis and lions in the second win- 

1 These arms are engraved in Lyson's ' Gloucestershire,' in cue of the plates 
already mentioned. 


dow from the east, on the north side of the choir. A border of 
lions and fleurs-de-lis, though commoner in glass of Edward HI.'s 
time, in this instance may have reference to Edward II. and his 
queen, Isabella of France. But, however this may be, there can 
be very little difference between the date of this glass and that 
of the east window. 

With regard to the interpolated glass, I am inclined to think 
that it also is of the same date, or nearly so, as the glass in the 
east window. The border of yellow eagles displayed, on a green 
ground, now in the first window from the east on the south side, 
may certainly, from the agreement of its colouring with that of 
the coat of Gaveston — who bore three or more yellow eagles, on 
a green field — be supposed to allude to that favourite, and 
therefore to be earlier than 1312 ; but for this supposition I 
should not have considered it to be older than the rest of the 
glass. "With regard to the knights with the white and red 
crosses — the opinion that they are impersonifications of the 
orders of the Hospitallers and Templars, would require the date 
of the glass to be put as early as 1307, when the Templars 
began to be persecuted in England ; or, at least, as early as 
1313, when the order was suppressed by the Pope : but so early 
a date can scarcely be reconciled with the use of the cyclas, and 
other peculiarities in the costume of these figures ; and, judging 
only from the internal evidence supplied by the glass itself, I 
should not be more inclined to put these figures, than the eagle 
border, earlier than 1320. The costume of the figures w T ould 
admit of a date as late as 1340. 1 It is therefore possible that 
these figures, like the fleurs-de-lis and lion border in the other 
window, may be of the commencement of the reign of Edward III. ; 
but it is impossible to be positive on such a point. 

The rest of the glass in the Cathedral need not detain us long. 
The oldest specimen undoubtedly is the small quantity of glass 
remaining in the tracery lights of the east window of the elder 
Lady Chapel, and which is as early as the end of the reign of 
Edward I. There are some Perpendicular fragments in their 
original position, in the west and south windows of the transept, 
the colouring of which is remarkably rich. The east windows 
of the choir aisles are both of the same date. It would appear 
from the arms in one of the windows, that they were the gift of 
Dean Glemham, in the reign of Charles II. The dulness of 
these windows, as compared with the older examples, is occa- 

b late mi instance of the use of the cyclas, in Lyson'a 'Berks,' p. 424. 


sioned by the mode of their execution ; glass coloured with 
enamels being used, in accordance with the practice of the day, 
in preference to glass coloured in its manufacture. 


The glass in the Mayor's Chapel affords a means of contrasting 
the later styles of painted glass with the earlier styles in the 
Cathedral. The greater part of it was, I believe, brought from 
Mr. Beckford's house at Fonthill. Amongst other specimens of 
cinque-cento work, I may mention an excellent figure of St. 
Barbara, in the east window; and a companion figure, of 
St. Catharine, of inferior merit. These, as well as most of the 
specimens of cinque-cento, seem to be of Flemish workmanship. 
The scourging of Christ, in one of the north windows, is remark- 
able for the use made of " sprinkled ruby " to represent His 
lacerated body. In another of the side windows — the first from 
the west — is some late French ornamental work, exhibiting the 
cyphers, mottoes, and emblems of Henry II. of France, and 
Diana of Poictiers. Some of this glass is dated 1543. 

In the west window of the south aisle of the chapel are some 
very good little German glass-paintings ; one of which is dated 
1537. These works, which, of course, were originally intended 
for close inspection, show that it is possible to combine a very 
high degree of finish with a full display of the brilliant and 
sparkling qualities of a glass-painting — a fact which modern 
glass-painters are too apt to overlook. 


The windows of this edifice, eastward of the central tower, 
retain a large proportion of their original glazing. And the 
glass is well worthy of examination, on account of its perfect 
state, and the general goodness of its execution. Unfortunately 
there is no other heraldry to guide us, as to its date, except the 
borders of lions and fleurs-de-lis, or of lions, or fleurs-de-lis only, 
which occur in most of the windows. 

An inscription in one of the windows of the Lady Chapel, 
which might have decided the question, has unluckily been 
obliterated in its most important part. The words " Ista eapella 
constructa est " are all that now remain. (It occurs in the first 
window from the east, on the south side of the Lady Chapel.) 
We are therefore left to infer the probable date of the glass from 
the internal evidence derivable from the style of the painting, 


the costumes, and texture of the material. And the conclusion 
that I have arrived at from these data is, that the Decorated 
glass at Wells is, as nearly as possible, contemporary with that 
of Bristol. Making allowance for a few years' difference in date 
between the various specimens at Wells, I think we may assign 
1320, or thereabouts, as the date of the glazing. 

The east window of the Lady Chapel has been restored — I 
wish I could add as conscientiously as the east window of Bristol 
has been ; for the artist here has thought proper permanently to 
obscure the remains of the old glass, as well as the modern glass 
used in the restoration — a device which, whilst it fails to render 
the modern glass undistinguishable from the old, greatly impairs 
the general effect of the window by depriving it of brilliancy. 
However, as there can be no doubt that the old design has been 
adhered to in the restoration, the window in its present state 
shows at a glance, what the side windows show only on careful 
examination — that the lower lights of these windows were 
filled with two tiers of figures and canopies. The tracery lights 
of the east window are filled with angels bearing the instruments 
of the Passion. The topmost tracery light of three of the side 
apsidal windows contains the emblem of one of the Evangelists, 
the fourth emblem has evidently been lost : and the other lights 
of the window, on the north side next the east, contain heads of 
Patriarchs ; and those of the opposite window the heads of eccle- 
siastical Saints. Some of these heads are very favourable speci- 
mens of the skill of the glass-painters of the period, and the idea 
of filling these small openings with busts, instead of entire 
figures, was happy. The same mode of filling the tracery 
lights is adopted in some of the other windows in the immediate 
vicinity of the Lady Chapel, which retain their original glazing. 
Amongst the busts are the heads of sainted Popes and Bishops, 
the names being written on labels behind. 

The east window of the choir is of singular design. The lower 
lights are filled with a Stem of Jesse, terminating, as at Bristol, 
with our Saviour on the Cross ; and the tracery lights with 
a representation of the Day of Judgment. Magnificent as is its 
colouring, the general effect of the window, owing to the too 
crowded character of the composition, is inferior to that of the 
east window of Bristol. It is impossible to distinguish the small 
figures in the Judgment, clearly, from the floor of the choir ; and 
the insertion of canopies over the figures in the Jesse tends to 
confuse the design. 

The clearstory windows, on each side of the choir, had origi- 


nally a figure and canopy in each of their lower lights. One of 
the figures, in the north window next the east, represents St. 
George, clad in a surcoat which reaches to the knee. He wears 
a helmet, avant and rerebras, shin pieces and sollerets of plate, 
or rather cuir bouilli, the rest of his person is defended with 
mail, on his shoulders are aiglettes. The costume of this figure 
appears to harmonise with the date assigned to the glass. In 
the tracery lights of this window is a continuation of the Judg- 
ment in the east window. 

The remains of glass in the Chapter House are but trifling. 
They seem, I think, to be of somewhat earlier date than the rest, 
but still are of the time of Edward II. 

There are some early Perpendicular fragments in the windows 
of the nave and transept. Some of the figures have the visored 
basinet and camall, the jupon, and heavy sword belt. 

In the west window of the nave is some cinque-cento glass, 
the more valuable as it happens to be a dated example. A 
Gascon inscription, as I believe, sets forth the year of grace 


The great attraction of Gloucester Cathedral is its magni- 
ficent east window, in many respects the finest in England. 
From the abundance of heraldry in the lower part of this 
window, I have little doubt that its date could be ascertained 
with considerable exactness; but the task of making out the 
charges on the shields has, owing to the dirty state of the glass, 
hitherto proved beyond my power. Though a decided enemy 
to Restorations, which in nine times out of ten would be more 
truly called Destructions, I confess I have often wished that this 
window had been placed in the hands of that real restorer, to 
whose tenderness and care the present satisfactory condition of 
the east window of Bristol is due. 1 

Under these circumstances, I can only hazard a conjecture 
that the probable date of the glass is very early in the second 
half of the fourteenth century. It is in all respects thoroughly 
Decorated in character, though the architecture of the window 
possesses Perpendicular features principally. But, as a general 
rule, it is true, that a change in the style of architecture has 
always preceded, by some years, the corresponding change in 
the style of painted glass. 

1 As to its subsequent restoration and date, see Memoir XIV. 


The glazing of the window is in its original position, and 
there is no ground for supposing that the somewhat sudden 
termination of the colouring towards the top of tlie window is 
accidental. On the contrary, it is evident that tlie arrangement 
of the glass in the upper part of the window is according to the 
original design. 

The two first tiers of lights from the ground are filled with 
coloured borders and ornamented white quarries, a shield of 
arms in a panel is inserted in each light, and a small ornamented 
roundel placed at some distance beneath it. The three next 
tiers of lights throughout the window are filled with figures and 
canopies, and, in the central part of the window, another tier 
likewise ; the spires of this row of canopies running into the tier 
of lights above. This arrangement, as might be expected, 
imparts a grand pyramidical character to the whole design. All 
the tracery lights of the window are filled with ornamented white 
quarries, and enriched with small roundels of ornament inserted 
here and there. 

The colouring of the lower lights — containing figures and 
canopies — is arranged on a principle not uncommon in Early 
Perpendicular glass. The figures are almost entirely white, 
having yellow stained hair, and borders to their robes: the 
architectural work of the canopies is wholly composed of white 
and yellow stained glass. The positive colouring is confined to 
the spire backgrounds of the canopies, and the tapestry which 
lines the interior of the niche. And it is carried in uniform 
streaks, or columns, down the window. Thus, the spire grounds 
and tapestries of the central column — which is two lights broad, 
all the other columns being only of the width of one light — are 
coloured red ; those of the next column, on each side the centre 
one, are coloured blue ; those of the next red — and so on. The 
large proportion of white used in the most coloured parts prevents 
any violent transition, from the figure and canopy part, to the 
quarry part of the window. 

The full effect of the Gloucester window, no doubt, depends 
not only on the simplicity of the composition, the largeness of 
its parts, and the breadth of its colouring, but also on the excel- 
lence of the material of which the window is composed. Still, I 
know no window so likely as this to improve by long contempla- 
tion the taste of modern glass-painters, and their patrons. 

The side windows of the choir clearstory retain enough of 
their original glazing — which is precisely of the same date as 
that of tlie east window — to enable us to perceive that their 


lower tier of lights was filled with figures and canopies, and their 
upper tier and tracery lights with borders and quarry patterns, 
having small roundels of ornament inserted of the same cha- 
racter as the pattern work in the east window. A corroborative 
proof, if any were necessary, of the originality of the arrange- 
ment of the glass in the upper part of the east window, with 
which the arrangement of the glass in the side windows so per- 
fectly harmonises. 

There are very interesting remains of Early Perpendicular 
and Decorated glass in other windows of Gloucester Cathedral, 
to which I cannot further advert for want of time. 

The east window of the Lady Chapel, which is in very fair 
preservation, is of the last half of the fifteenth century. 


The foregoing list of fourteenth-century glass would not be 
complete without some notice of the remains in Exeter Cathedral. 
But this will not detain us long. Very little of the glass is in its 
original position. I have no doubt, judging from its style, the 
absence of the yellow stain, &c, that the greater portion is of 
the latter part of the reign of Edward I.; and the later glass 
seems early in the reign of Edward II. Britton, in his History 
of the Cathedral, mentions that about 500 feet of glass was 
bought in 1303-4 ; and that a large quantity was purchased in 
1317, at Kouen. It is possible that some of this may be extant. 
I was much struck with the purity and hardness of the white 
glass composing even the earlier patterns ; a feature which may 
likewise be remarked in the remains of Early Decorated glass at 
Westminster Abbey, and in Merton Chapel, Oxford. It is 
possible that this glass was obtained from a common source. 

The most perfect window is the fourth from the east, on the 
north side of the choir clearstory. There is a great variety of 
very beautiful patterns, and many details of peculiar interest, in 
most of the choir windows, and the windows of the chapels about 
the choir. Several of these patterns have been so tastily touched 
up with colour in the last century — by Peckitt, I presume — as 
to be at first sight not a little puzzling. On the whole, the 
Exeter glass will be found to repay a visit. 

The modern glass in the west window, and the ruby with which 
the old patterns have been retouched, is interesting ; as being, 
perhaps, some of the latest ruby that was manufactured in 
England, before M. Bontemps revived the art. Some of the 


bull's eyes of this ruby are inserted in the east window of the 
choir. The date of the west window, I have been informed, is 

Such is the account I have attempted to give of these ancient 
relics. I have purposely omitted many curious details, from a 
fear of trespassing upon your time more unwarrantably than I 
have done already. Yet, imperfect as this sketch necessarily is, 
it will not be useless if it should incite but one person to a real 
study of the subject of painted glass. It is only by repeatedly 
looking at ancient glass that we learn to appreciate its pecu- 
liarities. It is by slow degrees that the eye becomes accustomed 
to its tone ; still more slowly, may I add, is the mind convinced 
that all styles of painted glass have their excellences and their 
defects. In approaching a subject on which there can be no 
appeal to any generally recognised standard, we cannot be too 
much on our guard against being deceived by our prejudices. 
This remark is peculiarly applicable to the study of glass- 
painting ; because it has, unfortunately, become associated with 
opinions with which it has only an accidental connexion. Like 
architecture, painted glass has been, I know not why, regarded 
as a subject of almost purely ecclesiastical interest, and hence 
has been exposed to much misapplied criticism ; a great deal of 
which has reference not exclusively to glass-painting as such, 
nor to any mode of representation, and is founded rather on 
theological than artistic considerations. 

Certain styles of painted glass, and of architecture, moreover, 
have been regarded as objectionable, or made the theme of 
enthusiastic admiration ; not so much on account of their intrinsic 
defects or excellences, as from a dislike or predilection for certain 
views which are thought to be necessarily associated with such 
styles. For instance, we all know that by a certain class of 
writers, Palladian architecture, although so widely differing from 
the classical styles, and although it has been actually more uni- 
versally employed for ecclesiastical purposes than the Gothic, is 
branded as " Pagan," and unholy ; whilst Gothic architecture 
alone rejoices in the appellation of Christian architecture, and 
certain symbols of acknowledged Pagan origin, such as the 
crescent of the Virgin, by being associated with it, are, as we 
are told, " hallowed." In like manner, the cinque-cento style of 
painted glass is held up to scorn and reprobation as a " Paganism ; " 
whilst that of the thirteenth century, " the age of faith," is con- 
sidered to be truly Christian. It is not for me to inquire whether 
such epithets are properly or improperly applied, or whether 


Christianity has deteriorated ever since the time when the spirit 
of ecclesiastical domination was curbed ; but that the continued 
use of these, as well as of other nicknames, is intended to create 
a prejudice, and does, in fact, not unfrequently produce this 
result with unreflecting persons, is indisputable. The student of 
glass- painting must, however, be superior to such influences. He 
will find that all styles of ancient glass are equally worthy his 
attention ; and, in particular, will not fail to perceive that, on 
comparing one with another, inferiority on one point is not 
unfrequently compensated by, if not the cause of, superiority on 
another ; or, to be struck with the general consistency of conven- 
tion practised in each style. For instance, the intense and 
sparkling colouring common to glass-paintings of the fourteenth 
century, is sought for in vain in a cinque-cento glass-painting ; 
and the delicate execution of the cinque-cento is equally wanting 
in the earlier work ; yet it is unquestionable that the delicate 
shading employed by the cinque-cento artists would, in great 
measure, be lost in the powerful colouring of a glass-painting of 
the fourteenth century ; and it is certain that nothing would be 
more miserable in effect, than a work executed in the simple 
manner of the fourteenth century, upon the comparatively poor 
material of the sixteenth. 1 

I am much mistaken if the lesson to be learnt from an unpre- 
judiced examination of all styles of painted glass, will not tend 
to a belief that the modern system of copying or closely imi- 
tating old work is erroneous ; not only on artistic principles, but 
considered as a means of merely reproducing their effect. 

I am aware that certain writers, more distinguished, perhaps, 
for the flippancy of their remarks than the accuracy of their 
statements, deny the existence of any perceptible difference 
between the glass, for instance, of the fourteenth century and 
that used in imitation of it. But, as the existence of such 
difference is capable of easy proof, and as these self-styled 
" leaders of the movement " are, notwithstanding their preten- 
sions, only following the lead of public opinion, I shall expect to 
find them asserting their belief in its existence, as soon as that 
belief becomes popular ; as it must, if such examination of old 
glass as 1 have recommended be generally made. Believing, as 
I do, that although glass might easily be manufactured more 
harmonious in its tone than that now used, vet, that it will ever 

1 Messrs. Pugin and Hard man's imitations of thirteenth and fourteenth century 
glass most fully prove the correctness of the opinion stated in the test. 


be a matter of extreme difficulty to reproduce the diaphanous, 
rich, or pearl-like material of the fourteenth and previous cen- 
turies : I confess I see no reason for abandoning or qualifying 
any of the views I have long since expressed, relating to the 
invention of a nineteenth century style of glass-painting, suffi- 
ciently plastic to mould itself into conformity with the character 
of edifices of different dates : x and, in the formation of which, 
ideas, especially as regards arrangement of colour, should be 
freely borrowed from those later styles in which a material was 
employed not dissimilar in character from that which can now, 
or will, in all likelihood, be obtained. Even if the time per- 
mitted, it would be premature, if not unnecessary, to enter into 
the details of the scheme more fully than 1 have done already on 
various occasions ; since I am persuaded that, if the necessity of 
forming a new style is conceded, the mode of carrying it into 
effect will soon suggest itself. The opinion that a new style is 
necessary, to meet technical difficulties and the requirements of 
the age, is all that I seek to establish. The only indulgence I 
crave is, that the subject may be thoroughly investigated before 
that opinion is condemned. 

1 Since the above remarks were in Still the necessity for a nineteenth- 
type, some experiments, the results of century style continues ; although the 
which I stated in a paper read before discoveries alluded to will involve a 
the Royal Institute of British Archi- modification of some of my previously 
tects, 14th June, 1852, have shown the expressed views as to what that style 
possibility of making white and coloured should be. (The memoir referred to is 
glass equal in tone, and true to that of that which follows.) 
the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. 




Charles "Winston, del. 

[ Belamotie.Litho 


Vincent, Brooks 



Read at the Ordinary Meeting of the Royal Institute of British Architects, 
June 14th, 1852. 

HE point to which I have to direct your atten- 
tion is, " a revived manufacture of glass used in 
ancient windows ; " but, in order that the im- 
portance of the subject may not be underrated, 
I wish to make some remarks, in the first place, 
on the harmony observable between the design 
and execution of glass-paintings and the quality 
of the material of which they are composed — a 
harmony which, though more remarkable at some periods than 
at others, may yet be observed, in a greater or less degree, in 
all works having any pretension to originality. It is only when 
the perception of the artist has become blunted, and his inven- 
tion paralysed by a habit of servile, unreflecting imitation, that. 
all trace of the harmony is lost. I cannot better illustrate my 
meaning than by contrasting the glass-paintings of the middle 
of the sixteenth century with those of the twelfth and thir- 

At this early period, when the richest, the most beautiful, and 
the deepest colouring in glass that we are acquainted with was 
employed, we always find that the picture was both designed 
and executed in the simplest manner. There are no compli- 
cated groups, no atmospheric effects ; hardly any effect of 
light and shade, and no high finish. If a group is repre- 
sented, the figures all appear to be in the same plane, and to be 
cut out by a stiff background of deep blue or red. A land- 
scape is rarely attempted ; when this is the case, it is sym- 
bolised, rather than represented, by trees, buildings, or other 
accessories, of most mediaeval cut and conventional character, 
which always appear, by the positiveness of their colouring, to 
be in the same plane as the figures, and, like them, are cut out 


by the aforesaid stiff background. The whole expression of the 
drawing is conveyed by means of strong black outlines, the effect 
of which is usually heightened by a simple wash of shadow in 
half-tint, the edges of which are left hard. In short, the artists 
of this early time seem to have aimed at producing little less 
than a rich mosaic, of the most vivid and harmonious hues. 

I say they seem to have done so, for I am morally certain that 
they were really as ambitious of pictorial effect as any of their 
successors, and that their not having achieved it resulted rather 
from circumstances and want of skill, than from any lack of 
intention. Had these men really adopted a flat style, on prin- 
ciple, they could hardly have failed to avoid those inconsistencies 
which are so obvious in their works, such as representing a 
landscape at all under such conditions ; shading the figure, and 
giving it a greater relief than the canopy under which it is sup- 
posed to be placed ; and regulating the depth of the shading 
rather by the size of the figure, than the intended position of 
the painting in the church. 

Had they acted on a well understood principle, we might have 
expected to find some attempt made to lessen, if not obviate, 
the indistinctness resulting from a flat treatment, by means of a 
proper arrangement of the colouring ; but the instances where 
the entire colouring of a group is strongly contrasted with the 
hue of the background, are so rare as to justify the supposition 
that they were accidental. I am, I confess, led by these, and 
similar considerations, irresistibly, to the conclusion that the 
glass-painters of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, though 
great colourists, were not, in other respects, great artists ; and, 
that whatever we find good in their works, is the rich legacy of 
antiquity : that, as we undoubtedly owe to Pagan times the art 
of imparting these magnificent colours to glass, 1 so do we owe to 
the influence of Pagan art that style of low relief which, cor- 
rupted by the Byzantines, and misunderstood in " y e ages of 
feythe," is, nevertheless, so far as it is developed in the windows 
of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, so truly admirable, 

1 The truth, of this will sufficiently resemblance which the most superficial 

appear on comparing the coloured glass observer must recognise of the twelfth 

of the twefth century with the speci- and early thirteenth century draperies 

mens of Roman and Greek glass in the and figures to those of the Greek school 

British Museum. So complete an iden- of art, raises a reasonable inference that 

tity of colour argues an identity of the glass-painters of those times, though, 

manufacture, which manufacture there in all probability, natives of the country 

is good ground for believing was handed in which they practised, derived their 

down from Pagan times. The strong art from the Byzantines. 


because so excellently adapted to the stiff and intense colours 
of the period — colours so intense and unvarying in depth as 
to preclude the possibility of their being made subservient to 
those pictorial effects which are indispensable to the satisfactory 
representation of a subject whose composition would rank above 
that of a bas-relief. 

The contrast afforded by turning to a glass-painting of the 
middle of the sixteenth century is very striking. We no longer 
behold a stiff mosaic depending for success almost exclusively on 
the richness of its colouring, but, on the contrary, a picture, 
brilliant, it is true, but resting its claims quite as much on its 
composition and general treatment as on the vivacity of its 
hues. Here complicated foreground groups, as well as im- 
portant architectural accessories, are introduced; they are deli- 
neated correctly, and highly finished. The relative distances of 
the various objects are preserved by means of light and shade ; 
and the landscape background, monotonous as it may appear 
in comparison with that of an oil or fresco painting, recedes and 
disengages itself from the figures and architecture, imparting to 
the picture an effect of atmosphere. 

The glass of which this picture is composed will be found, on 
examination, to differ widely from that used in the twelfth and 
thirteenth centuries. In general it is thinner in substance ; it is 
always weaker in tint ; and on that account, if regarded simply 
as a vehicle for colour, would be far inferior to the elder mate- 
rial. Yet for the purpose to which it is applied it could not be 
more suitable. Its pellucidness and lightness of tint are admir- 
ably calculated to display the high finish of the painting, to 
favour atmospheric effect, and vivid contrasts of light and 
shade. Nor does the employment of a material comparatively 
so flimsy and weak impart a corresponding flimsiness or weak- 
ness to the picture. A good specimen of cinque-cento work will 
be found as imposing in effect as a window of the twelfth or 
thirteenth century. Let any one endeavour to recall to mind 
the glass at Chartres, and that filling the four windows of the 
chapel of the Miraculous Sacrament in Brussels Cathedral. I 
am sure he will feel an impression that he has seen something 
at both places equally striking, something equally removed from 
flimsiness or poverty. The paradox is easily explained when 
we consider that in the mosaics of the twelfth and thirteenth 
centuries the effect of the glass is but little aided by contrast of 
colour or by shading; whereas in the pictures of the cinque- 
cento period, not only is the colouring arranged in broader 



masses, which is of itself a great assistance to a poor material, 
but the strongest contrasts of colour and of light and shade are 

I have now compared the best exponent I have been able to 
find of a flat style of glass-painting with what I believe to be a 
perfect exponent of the rotund or pictorial style of glass-painting, 
and I have endeavoured to point out that in each specimen the 
quality of the glass, and mode of painting it, are alike different ; 
and further, that each kind of glass, and each mode of using it, 
are severally calculated to act and react upon one another, so as 
to set both off to the greatest advantage. 

It will be useful to pursue the subject further, and show that 
during the whole interval which elapsed between the abandon- 
ment of the flat or mosaic style, at the end of the thirteenth or 
middle of the fourteenth century, and the adoption of the rotund 
or pictorial style, which it took two centuries to perfect in the 
cinque-cento, a certain harmony existed between the quality of 
the material and the mode of working it. It would be rather a 
matter of curiosity than of practical advantage to speculate on 
the causes which led to these changes in the quality of the 
material and the mode of working' it. If I might hazard a con- 
jecture, I should be inclined to say that it was a change in the 
manufacture which induced, or necessitated, a change in the 
painting, and not the reverse ; because we >know that from 
Pliny's time, downwards, the effort has always been to improve 
on the manufacture of glass, that is, to render the material more 
pure and pellucid, and better fitted for domestic purposes, with- 
out reference to its employment in painted windows. But, how- 
ever this may be, each change in the manufacture, and each 
change in the mode of painting, were, in general, contempo- 

There was but little change in the quality of the glass between 
the end of the thirteenth century and the middle of the four- 
teenth, if, perhaps, we except the deterioration of some of the 
colours; the deep blue appears to have lost its sapphire-like 
hue with the decline of Byzantine influences, soon after the 
middle of the thirteenth century. And, during the same 
period, the principles of the flat style were subjected to scarcely 
any greater violation than they had already, if not always, sus- 
tained. But in the second half of the fourteenth century, and, 
as it would appear, in this country at least, about 1380, an im- 
portant change in the manufacture of the material took place. 
The white glass became purer, and all the coloured glass lighter 


in tint. Simultaneously a not less important change in the mode 
of painting- was effected. It is true that the colouring had 
become broader and less mosaic, and the designs somewhat 
more pictorial, previously to the change in the material in 
1380 ; and this is particularly remarkable in the glass-paintings 
of Germany, in which country I am strongly inclined to think 
that the alteration in the glass manufacture originated. But 
the change to which I would now particularly advert is in the 
execution of the painting. 

Wykeham's glass at New College Chapel, Oxford, which is 
one of the earliest specimens, may be referred to in illustration 
of it. The outlines became thinner, the shadows broader and 
softer, the painting altogether higher wrought and finished, and 
the treatment generally more pictorial. By the end of the 
fourteenth century the new style of execution was established, 
as we see it in the east window of York Minster. But, though 
rotund and pictorial in principle, it was not rotund or pictorial 
in effect till the end of the first quarter of the sixteenth cen- 
tury, when the bolder practice of the cinque-cento artists brought 
it out in all its vigour. Still, though we must regard the works 
of this long intermediate period as inferior alike to the painted 
glass of the thirteenth century and the cinque-cento time, having 
neither the depth of colour of the one nor the pictorial power of 
the other, it is impossible to examine them without perceiving 
that their authors must have felt that the more delicate material 
with which they were furnished invited, if not demanded, a more 
delicate mode of execution. 

Again, we may trace in all works executed since the middle of 
the sixteenth century down to the present time, except, indeed, 
the recent imitations of mediaeval glass-paintings, a certain 
degree of harmony between the quality of the material and the 
mode of working it. I do not intend to enter upon the compa- 
rative merits of the mode of execution adopted by the cinque- 
cento artists, who used an enamel colour only for the purposes 
of shading, and of the mode of execution adopted subsequently, 
according to which enamel colours were used more or less in 
substitution of glass coloured in its manufacture, though I admit 
I entertain a strong opinion in favour of the former, because I 
know that the question is extensive enough, if gone into, to form 
the subject of a separate inquiry. But, apart from this con- 
sideration, we see in all the works of the Van Linges, the Prices, 
the Jervaises, and, lastly, in the modern Munich glass, a very 
delicate and finished style of painting, combined with the use of 



a material so delicate and pellucid as to appear extremely flimsy, 
were its thinness not disguised by the mode of painting it. In 
all glass-paintings, therefore, of whatever period, with the single 
exception I have named, we find the execution and design of 
the painting vary with the quality of the glass, being simple 
when the glass was rich in colour, and not over transparent ; and 
proportionately more and more delicate and complicated as the 
glass became weaker in colour, more pellucid, and more thin in 
effect. And if any proof were wanting, either that these corre- 
sponding changes were intentional, or dictated by good taste 
and sound sense, it is amply afforded us by the modern copies of 
media? val glass, and even by the devices resorted to in order to 
insure as much as possible the fidelity of the imitation ; and, I 
am sorry to add, the enormous mendacity not unfrequently 
relied upon in support of a bad case. 

The works to which I allude are copies of glass-paintings of the 
twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries. Some 
persons roundly assert that there exists a positive identity of 
effect between these copies and the originals ; others seek to 
excuse any apparent difference by the remark that age alone is 
wanting to complete the identity. In dealing with these asser- 
tions I shall assume the possibility of making exact copies of the 
design and manipulation of ancient glass-paintings, for, though I 
have never met with an instance of such exactness in English 
work, I certainly have met with it repeatedly in French. I shall 
therefore found whatever I have to urge in disproof of this alleged 
identity, or would-be identity, upon an examination of the natnre 
and quality of the material of which these copies are composed. 

I have discovered a simple mode of testing whether, on the 
one hand, glass is sufficiently opaque, so as not to appear flimsy 
or watery when put up in a window unassisted by shading, 
according to the practice of the flat style of glass-painting ; on 
the other, whether it is sufficiently clear to produce as brilliant 
an effect as the old does. It is this : if the glass, held at arm's- 
length from the eye, and at the distance of more than a yard 
from an object, does not permit of that object being distinctly 
seen through it, the glass will be sufficiently opaque ; and if, 
when held at the same distance from the eye, and at the distance 
of not more than a yard from the object, it permits of the latter 
being distinctly seen through the glass, it will be sufficiently 
clear and transparent. I have found this to be the case with a 
ureat many pieces of glass of the twelfth, thirteenth, and four- 
teenth centuries, which had been rendered clear by polishing the 


surface, or which were already quite clear ; for it is a great 
mistake to suppose that all old glass has been rendered dull en 
the surface by exposure to the atmosphere. I have seen a great 
deal of glass of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries that is as 
clear now as when it was first made, its surface not having been 
corroded in the least. But the glass of which these imitative 
works are made is either smooth on the surface, and so pellucid 
and watery as, when held at arm's-length, to permit of any 
object being perfectly seen through it which is at the distance of 
100, or even 1000 yards, or more ; or else is artificially rough- 
ened on the surface — a practice which reduces the condition of 
the glass nearly to that of ground-glass — for, when held at arm's 
length, it will not permit of any object being seen distinctly 
through it which is distant more than an inch from the glass. 

The practice, not unfrequently resorted to by the imitators of 
old glass, of antiquating smooth-surfaced glass, that is, dulling 
it with the enamel colour used for painting the outlines, renders 
it, when held at arm's-length, nearly, if not quite, as opaque as 
rough-surfaced glass ; indeed, almost the only perceptible dif- 
ference in this respect between rough-surfaced glass and smooth- 
surfaced glass that has been antiquated is, that the former is 
free from the tint necessarily imparted to the latter by the 
enamel colour with which it is antiquated. Thus we find that 
imitations of glass of the twelfth, thirteenth, or fourteenth cen- 
tury, if executed in smooth-surfaced glass that has not been 
antiquated, are poor and watery in comparison with original 
work of that period ; and that, if executed in glass that has been 
antiquated, or in rough-surfaced glass, they are much too opaque. 
In the one case, to speak popularly, the vision passes too unin- 
terruptedly through the glass ; in the other, it is stopped at the 
surface of the glass, instead of passing about a yard through it, 
as in the case of ancient work. 

I might show the non-identity of modern glass with ancient, 
even by a reference to the difference of its colouring ; the old 
being invariably harmonious and rich, the modern almost as 
invariably raw, crude, and poor in tone, a circumstance arising 
partly from the use of colouring materials different from those 
formerly employed, partly from a difference in the make of the 
glass. But I am content to leave the case as it stands. I can- 
not, however, forbear the remark that it is most amusing to find 
many earnest admirers of mediaeval imitations, who, though 
apparently ignorant of the practice ot roughing the surface of 
glass, are aware of the pernicious effect of " smudging," or 


" antiquating," that which is smoothly surfaced, attributing to 
windows on which neither of these practices has been employed 
the effect of ancient ones, because, as they assert, "the glass 
then remains clear and pure as in ancient times." Was there 
ever so entire a misconception ? Is flimsiness or wateriness a 
characteristic of ancient glass ? Do we ever find the glass even 
of the sixteenth century as flimsy and watery as that used in 
the works to which they allude as exact imitations of glass- 
paintings of the thirteenth ? Of course we do not. I say of 
course, because recent analyses have discovered the presence 
of at least one constituent of old glass which does not exist in 
the modern, and which, on being purposely introduced, produces 
that selfsame effect of solidity and richness which we perceive 
and admire in the old. 

It is now time to advert to the revived manufacture of glass, 
which constitutes the text of this paper ; and in doing so I must 
disclaim any merit that may attach to the discovery beyond 
having started the inquiry which led to it, and sometimes 
having given an opinion on the quality of the colours produced. 
The merit of the discovery is to be ascribed to the chemical 
science of my friend Mr. Medlock, of the Royal College of 
Chemistry, and the practical skill of Mr. Edward Green, of 
Messrs. Powell's glass-works in Whitefriars. 

I was anxious in the autumn of 1849 to procure some blue 
glass like that of the twelfth century ; that is to say, not a raw 
positive blue, such as we see in modern windows, but a soft, 
bright, intense blue, or rather a sort of neutralized purple. And 
for this purpose I submitted some twelfth century blue glass to 
Mr. Medlock for analysis. He completed his analysis in Easter- 
week, 1850, and thereby determined that the colouring matter 
was cobalt, thus putting an end to many ingenious speculations 
that had been previously formed on the subject, some, I am 
afraid, without much reflection. The lajDis lazuli theory, which 
has been embraced by Mr. Hendrie in his translation of 
' Theophilus,' and Mrs. Merrifield, in her ' Ancient Practice of 
Painting,' is, indeed, opposed to the testimony of Dr. Merret in 
the seventeenth century, in a note by him on the treatise of 
Neri, where he declares that he had ascertained by experiment 
the impossibility of colouring glass blue with lapis lazuli, about 
which there can be no doubt. Mr. Medlock intends, I know, to 
prosecute his inquiries on the subject of blue glass, and to 
analyse various specimens from the twelfth to the sixteenth 
rentury, when we know that cobalt was employed, so as to form 


a series which, when connected Avith the analyses of Roman and 
Greek glass made by Sir Henry de la Beche and others, will 
form a most valuable chain in the history of the manufacture. 
It would therefore be unbecoming in me to anticipate Mr. 
Medlock's Memoir by giving a more detailed statement of this 
analysis; I may, however, add, that the discovery of the true 
colouring matter was but one of the beneficial results of this 
analysis ; for in working it out practically, in which due atten- 
tion was paid to the ancient receipts, the ancient art of making 
white and coloured glass was, in effect, revived. I say revived, 
for, between the glass that has been already made, and the old, 
I can discover no perceptible difference, though I have tested it 
in every way I can conceive, short of actually having a window 
made of it. I had hoped that it would have been subjected to 
this test ere now, but it will, at all events, be very shortly sub- 
mitted to it ; and as the blue in question, and, indeed, the rest 
of the new glass already made, is destined for some windows in 
the round part of the Temple Church, in which my friend the 
Rev. J. L. Petit and myself are interested, I need not say that 
you will all have an opportunity of judging for yourselves 
whether or not the experiment is successful. It is, of course, 
never wise to halloo till you are out of the wood, and, had I 
foreseen the unavoidable delays that have retarded the manu- 
facture, I should have declined addressing you at present. 
However, as my name was actually put down, I did not think it 
right to cause any fresh arrangements to be made, more parti- 
cularly as I have reasonable grounds for believing in the success 
of the experiment. 1 

I have now to offer a few remarks in conclusion, which, con- 
sidering the time I have already trespassed on your attention, I 
have condensed as much as possible. I have to appeal to you, 
the professors of the noblest of arts, in favour of this unhappy 
art of glass-painting. I call it an art, because it is impossible to 
look at the glass at Chartres, Angers, or Brussels, without 
feeling that glass-painting was once practised by artists. I will 
ask you by whom it is now practised in this country? for abroad 
it is still artistical ; and further, whose fault is it that it con - 

1 Mr. Hughes of Frith Street, who bury, Eushall, and Perm, Staffordshire ; 

was usually employed by Mr. Winston Birstwith, Gargrave, Kildwick, York- 

on works in which he was interested, shire ; St. Asaph's Cathedral, and the 

has given the names of many places Chapel of llozel, Jersey. The first 

where the new glass has been used, piece of blue glass successfully obtained 

Among them arc the churches of Bush- is in Mr. Hughes' possession. 


tinues in such bad hands ? It cannot be for lack of encourage- 
ment, for I doubt not but that, if all the money that has been 
expended on painted windows within the last twenty years were 
added together, it would be found to equal, if not exceed, the 
sums paid to Raphael or Michael Angelo. The fault lies in 
those who have imbibed the exaggerated and rather senti- 
mental estimate of the middle ages, which is so fashionable ; 
who persist in regarding those ages at a distance which, soft- 
ening down deformities, keeps mean and debasing objects out of 
sight, and leaves only the more noble and lofty ones conspicuous ; 
who suffer their feelings to be so captivated by the pleasing 
phantom of their imagination as to admit neither beauty nor 
propriety in anything that does not remind them of the middle 
ages, and therefore prefer copies of mediaeval work to anything 
that the art of the nineteenth century can invent. To such 
persons I have long ceased to address myself; it is no use 
arguing against a man's feelings, however conclusive may be the 
facts adduced. I therefore appeal to you, who possess collec- 
tively so great an influence in these matters, whether it is enough 
to have improved in the manufacture of coloured glass? And 
here I would especially address myself to the Greeks, with whom 
I am connected by all my early associations, by my pagan 
education. Is there any reason why painted glass should be 
banished from buildings in the Classical style ? For Palladian 
churches you have the cinque-cento style made to your hands, a 
style susceptible of high artistical development, and which 
neither in its treatment nor in its ornament is more severe than 
the architecture of the building. I advert to the circumstance, 
because in a neighbouring church — St. James's, Piccadilly — 
mediaeval influences have so far triumphed as to cause the intro- 
duction of painted glass more severe in style than the church 
itself — glass winch I have often heard made the theme of extra- 
vagant admiration. And for churches in the Greek style, surely 
it would not be difficult to form an artistically flat style; I say 
flat, because a flat style may be made more severe than a rotund 
style could be in painted glass, using the powerful and beautiful 
colours whose resuscitation I have proclaimed, and resorting to 
the pure models of antiquity for the forms. The researches of 
Mr. Penrose and others have exploded the idea that weak colours 
only are appropriate for the decoration of Greek architecture ; 
why not, then, use deep colours in the windows, and shame the 
mediaevals into some sort of improvement, by associating beauti- 
ful colouring with exquisite drawing? 


[In the Transactions of the Institute an account of a discussion 
on glass-painting follows. In the course of it Mr. Winston, in 
reply to an inquiry whether subjecting the paintings of ancient 
windows to any alkaline wash had the effect of cleaning them 
without rendering the colours crude by removing the softening 
down of tone which time had produced, stated that he had 
washed a good number of pieces, and found that it had the effect 
of making the colours purer. Some of the glass to which he had 
applied the test was as clean as it was the day it was put by, 
and the only reason he could assign for it was, that it contained 
a greater quantity of silex than usual in proportion to the alkali, 
and was, therefore, not so easily attacked by the atmosphere. It 
was capable of being toned down, and then, certainly, some of 
the colour must be lost. The glass in King's College Chapel, 
Cambridge, was of the same date, and as light, as that used in 
the cathedral at Brussels, and he had cleaned some of it, and 
found the same result — that old glass cleaned had a better 
effect than uncleaned glass of the same date ; but, compared 
with modern glass, old glass, cleaned or uncleaned, will always 
be found superior in tone and effect.] 


An explanation given at the Ordinary General Meeting of the Royal Institute 
of British Architects, March 7, 1853. 

E. WINSTON gave a popular explanation of the 
methods of painting upon glass. In the course 
of it, he said,' that no one could deny the fitness 
of the enamel system for small cabinet works, 
destined to be seen near the eye, allowing as 
this system did for the utmost minuteness of 
execution. That nothing could be more exqui- 
site in its way than one of the works exhibited 
at the Exhibition of 1851, entitled " Lucia Mondella," by Val- 
secchi of Milan, in which the effect of a portrait in oil was 
produced on glass with the most marvellous fidelity ; but that it 
was not to such purposes as these that painted glass was ordi- 
narily applied. That it was chiefly employed for works on a 
laro-e scale, and such as were intended to be viewed from a 
distance. That for such works the Enamel system was not 
suited ; because colour applied to glass with a brush could not 
possibly be so brilliant as colour made in the glass-house. That, 
in exemplification, though it was true that blue pot-metal glass 
was nothing more than white glass mixed with cobalt and fused, 
and that the enamel blue applicable to glass consisted of soft 
white glass mixed with cobalt, which was fused upon the glass, yet 
the greater and longer-continued heat of the glass-house, as com- 
pared with that of the glass-painter's kiln, caused a more thorough 
admixture of the vitreous with the colouring particles to take 
place, which occasioned the superior transparency, and conse- 
quent brilliancy and power, of, for instance, coated blue glass, as 
compared with white glass to which a blue tint had been im- 
parted by means of enamel blue. That the dulness and want of 

1 The preceding part of the explanation is here omitted, as it does not 
contain anything which is not more fully given in the present volume. 


power of enamel-colouring must be obvious to any one who had 
seen the painted windows in the Barons' Hall, Arundel Castle ; 
or Reynolds's window at New College, Oxford ; or the west 
window of Magdalen College, Oxford. 

That the objection sometimes urged against the employment 
of the mosaic system, the unavoidable use of lead-work to 
connect the fabric, really applied with equal force to the enamel 
system ; for that it was impossible to expose, without breaking 
them, very large sheets of glass in the glass-painter's kiln to a 
heat sufficient to vitrify the enamel colour, and thoroughly weld 
it to the glass. That the largest sheets of painted glass that 
had come to Mr. Winston's notice were exhibited in Hyde Park, 
in 1851, by the St. Helen's Glass Company, but that in them 
the enamel was barely vitrified, and was in consequence very 
opaque, and would peel off in a few years ; and that these sheets 
of glass, though interesting to the critical inquirer, and notwith- 
standing the merits of Mr. Frank Howard's designs from which 
they had been executed, must as glass-painting be admitted to 
have been utter failures. That, supposing these sheets could 
have been properly burnt, their size, which Mr. Winston thought 
could not have exceeded three feet by six feet, large as that 
must be considered, was but small in comparison with the opening 
of an ordinary window, and consequently that such a window 
must be filled with several pieces of glass, which would render 
the employment of a metal framework necessary to give stability 
to the fabric. That in ordinary practice the pieces of glass of 
which an enamel painting was composed, were cut into square 
or rectangular forms, and held together with lead-work, which 
gave the appearance of the pictures being covered with a black 
net-work, as might be observed in Reynolds's window at Oxford. 

That, seeing that the employment of opaque metal-work in a 
glass-painting might be considered as one of the conditions of 
the branch of art, and that enamel glass-paintings never had the 
depth or juiciness of oil-paintings nor the brilliancy of mosaic 
glass-paintings, it appeared that the mosaic system of glass- 
painting was on the whole best suited for large works. That 
this was proved by the examination of paintings executed 
according to the mosaic-enamel method, in which there was a 
diminution of power or brilliancy in proportion as enamel- 
colouring was substituted for coloured glass, or was employed as 
a wash to heighten its effect. That the beautiful work by 
Bertini, in the Great Exhibition, " Dante and his thoughts," 
might be cited in support ; that this work, if seen in the ordi- 


nary position of a painted window, instead of being viewed from 
a darkened apartment, would have looked dull in comparison 
with old windows executed under the mosaic system, as those in 
the chapel of the Miraculous Sacrament at Brussels. That, 
instead of endeavouring to imitate oil-paintings which were 
inimitable in glass, it seemed best, on the whole for artists to 
adopt that system of glass-painting under which, as in the 
mosaic system, the most vivid effects of colour that human art 
was capable of could be produced, and in which the necessary 
lead-lines might be made conducive to the effect of the picture 
instead of detracting from it ; and to design a glass-painting 
with the object and intention of executing it according to a 
system which afforded the artist very limited means of repre- 
sentation as compared with oil or water-colour painting, and was 
incapable at the very best of producing any great atmospheric 
effect ; and, above all, with the intention of affecting the most 
sudden and decided contrasts of light and shade — since, by this 
means, the leads might be most easily concealed from the 
spectator, and pass unnoticed in the general crispness of the 
picture. That the peculiar conditions of glass-painting seemed, 
on the whole, to have been hitherto most completely complied 
with in the windows of the chapel of the Miraculous Sacrament 
in Brussels Cathedral, and in the windows of the choir of Lich- 
field Cathedral, which were imported from Belgium, and were 
nearly contemporary with the Brussels windows, the whole of 
the windows in question having been painted between 1534 and 
1517. That it was not unreasonable to inquire what greater 
pictorial effect could be desired than was displayed in these 
windows. That, like fresco paintings (to which they bore a con- 
siderable general resemblance), they were simple and grand, 
and told their story fully and unmistakeably. That there could 
be no question what sort of pictures these w r ere ; that they were 
glass-paintings, and nothing else, differing from oil-paintings in 
their comparative want of atmosphere, and from both oil and 
fresco paintings in their vivid and intense colouring ; yet dis- 
playing in their composition and treatment the pains the artist 
had taken to render them as pictorially perfect as the means 
afforded. That in each window the subject was represented as 
seen under the influence of broad sunshine, consistently with 
which the most vivid contrasts of light and shade were introduced, 
producing the utmost crispness of effect, and so artfully concealing 
the lead-work, whilst the nature of the composition reminded 
the spectator very forcibly of the means resorted to by the 


greatest of painters to correct in a freso-painting an unpleasing 
degree of flatness — the successive archways introduced by 
Raphael in his School of Athens. 

That Mr. Winston was aware that in so strongly advocating 
the adoption of the mosaic system of glass-painting in preference 
to all others, and regarding the Brussels and Lichfield windows 
as showing the utmost to which practical effect in a glass- 
painting could he carried, he was acting in opposition to the 
practice of such men as Capronnier of Brussels, Bertini of Milan, 
aud that crowd of German artists who had already done so much 
to elevate glass-painting to a niche amongst the fine arts. But 
that it should be remembered that those artists were, in all pro- 
bability, driven into the practice of laying down all their high 
lights with enamel-colour, and so destroying the vividness of the 
works, by the necessity of correcting, as much as possible, the 
crudity and rawness of modern glass by every expedient in their 
power ; and that, perhaps, they would return to a more com- 
plete compliance with the practice of the ancient artists if they 
possessed the same excellent material that they did. 

In conclusion, Mr. Winston adverted to the fact that one of 
the windows he had given to the Temple Church, painted by 
Mr. Hughes, was erected in that building; that the glass of 
which it was composed had been made by Messrs. Powell, from 
analyses of ancient glass ; that the effect of this glass was all 
that could be desired, and therefore that the time had at last 
arrived when we might expect that works as harmonious in 
colour, and much better drawn than the best old specimens, 
would be produced ; and that mediaeval painted windows would 
be studied, not for direct imitation, but as objects of admiration, 
and as affording hints for modern application. 

In the discussion which followed, Mr. Winston, in reply to 
an inquiry as to the effect of silver-coloured glass, said that he 
considered the effect very good if the colour was not too deep. 
He added that the practice of putting tinfoil behind glass was 
known to the mediaeval artists ; there were some examples of it 
in the wooden shrine of King Sebert in the choir of Westminster 



Read at the Ordinary General Meeting of the Royal Institute of British Architects, 
November 28th, 1853. 

N composing this paper on Painted Glass with 
reference to its employment in Buildings in 
various styles of Architecture, I have endea- 
voured as much as possible to keep in mind the 
practical objects of this Society. Many matters, 
therefore, of interest to the antiquary, will be 
passed unnoticed, or with a brief allusion to 
them — my object being, as far as I am able, to 
supply an answer to the question, What is the kind of painted 
glass best suited to a building of a given character ? 

On a question so wide and complicated, it is not only natural 
that very different opinions should exist, but extremely difficult 
to ascertain which is the most correct. The inadequacy of 
language to express ideas so subtle as those of which questions 
of taste are composed, must ever be an insuperable obstacle to 
bringing questions of taste to a certain determination by argu- 
ment : a consideration which is condemnatory of the modern 
vice of dogmatizing upon such subjects. And the nature of the 
only remaining tribunal — the concurrent opinion of men of taste 
— that is of men who have given their attention to such matters, 
and whose views are respected by others engaged in the same 
pursuits — of itself sanctions a great latitude of sentiment. The 
feelings and habits, the education and temperament of indi- 
viduals, even their natural appreciation of form or colour, all 
insensibly influence their opinions on a subject respecting which 
there exists no definite standard. I am therefore very far from 
claiming any sort of infallibility for the views I am about to 
submit to your consideration — views which I shall attempt to 
support rather by calling your attention to objects with which 
you are already familiar, than by elaborate argument. 







The variety of buildings which may require to be decorated 
with painted glass is great. Some are in the Greek or Palla- 
dian styles of architecture, others are in the Gothic styles ; and 
each building may be more or less grave or solemn in its aspect 
than others of its class. Such differences in the buildings 
demand, of course, corresponding differences in their painted 
windows. But before entering upon this topic, it will be con- 
venient to declare what I believe to be the best subjects for glass- 
painting, and the best mode of executing them. With regard 
to the mode of executing glass-paintings, I will recall your 
attention to a paper which I read here, about a year ago, on the 
• Methods of Painting upon Glass. 1 In this, after stating that 
there were three distinct modes of executing glass-paintings, — 
viz., by the mosaic method, in which the local colouring of the 
picture is produced by means of glass coloured in its manufacture, 
the shadows and outlines only being executed with an enamel 
colour; by the enamel method, in which the colouring of the 
design is effected by using enamel colours ; and by the mosaic 
enamel method, in which the colouring of the picture is produced 
by a combination of the two former methods, — 1 concluded that 
the mosaic method was the best ; because it was, from the nature 
of the thing, more favourable than either of the others to a 
display of the translucent quality of glass, and consequently of 
its brilliant and powerful colours, whilst, at the same time, it 
afforded the means of executing works as highly pictorial as the 
windows of the transepts and north chapel of Brussels Cathedral 
— works which maintain their superiority in point of effect, when 
compared with a series of later examples, including some of the 
most beautiful specimens that modern continental art can boast. 
This conclusion, for the soundness of which I must refer you to 
the paper I have named, and to the works of art therein men- 
tioned, will confine our inquiry to what are the subjects best 
adapted for representation in glass-paintings, executed according 
to the mosaic method. 

These subjects may be divided into the following classes: 
patterns, similar to those used throughout the Mediaeval period, 
and which usually consist of ornamental work in white glass, bat 
sometimes of scrolls of foliage, either white or coloured, on a 
coloured ground ; pictures, where the objects are represented as 

1 'On the Methods of Painting upon 1853, and published in the Transactions. 
Glass,' read at the Ordinary General [It is the preceding memoir in this 
Meeting of the Institute, 7th March, volume.] 


seen in one plane, as in a bas-relief — such as we see in the 
painted windows of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries; and 
pictures, where the objects are represented as occupying several 
planes, as in nature — such as we meet with in the painted 
windows of the first half of the sixteenth century ; and, of course, 
compositions consisting entirely of such patterns or pictures, or 
partly of patterns and partly of pictures. To avoid any possible 
misconception, I should perhaps here state that any reference to 
Mediaeval examples in this paper is made only for the purpose 
of illustration, and not with any intention of conveying an im- 
pression that they are fit objects of imitation. Most valuable 
hints are doubtless to be obtained from an enlightened examina-' 
tion of such examples ; but before we think of copying them, we 
ought to be quite sure that they are worth copying ; and I will 
undertake to say that not one ancient example of painted glass, 
except, perhaps, those consisting of pattern-work, can be con- 
sidered as a perfect model for imitation. AH, with the trifling 
exceptions I have named, of whatever date, are defective in one 
way or another, either in composition, drawing, or general effect. 
Even the finest cinque-cento examples, which, taken collectively, 
are perhaps of all ancient examples the least open to criticism, 
were done at a time when the human figure was but imperfectly 
understood by the glass-painters. And with regard to the often 
expressed notion, that it is better to submit to copies of mediaBval 
examples than trust to modern invention, permit me to say that 
a more unjust imputation against the taste and skill of the 
nineteenth century never was made, or a more complete apology 
conceived for indolence and incapacity. Whose fault is it, I 
would ask, that low art, at least in regard to glass-painting, 
should seem to be almost inseparably associated with what are 
called Church principles of architecture ? Are not the patrons 
of the art to blame for indolently acquiescing in and sanctioning 
a mere system of copying, because they have not sufficient 
energy to study glass-painting thoroughly, and make themselves 
acquainted with its principle ? We may depend on it, if glass- 
painting, or I may say art in general, had a practical bearing on 
the affairs of life, instead of only furnishing a means of amuse- 
ment, we should no more hear of currency being given to such 
doctrines respecting it, than we now hear engineers advocating 
our going back to the single-condensing steam-engine, or tra- 
vellers by railway yearning for a return to the old horse- 

The patterns to which I have alluded do obviously comply 



with the conditions of the mosaic method in the fullest and 
simplest manner ; for the brilliancy of the glass is altogether 
unsubdued in these works, and the mechanical construction of 
the window is in harmony with their design— the lead-work 
connecting the pieces of glass, either forming an integral part of 
the pattern, or else actually constituting the pattern itself. I 
may illustrate my meaning by a reference to familiar examples, 
such as the Five Sisters, at York, and the geometrical pattern 
works, executed in white glass, so common in the seventeenth 
century, particularly on the Continent, of which engravings have 
occasionally appeared in the 'Builder.' 

Turning from these, the works which next appear the most 
completely and simply to comply with the conditions of the 
mosaic method, are the pictures of the twelfth and thirteenth 
centuries ; for, of all pictures, these admit of the employment of 
glass of the most powerful hue, and diminish its brilliancy the 
least. Here, also, the lead-work is made conducive to the effect 
of the design. It is true that in the cinque-cento style we meet 
with pictures in which, as in a bas-relief, all objects are repre- 
sented as occupying one plane as effectively as in a picture of 
the earlier period ; but in no glass-paintings is the bas-relief 
principle of representation effectively carried out with so much 
simplicity as in the pictures of the twelfth and thirteenth cen- 
turies. This, I apprehend, is owing no less to the nature of the 
glass of which these works are formed, than to the composition 
of the picture. This glass, when compared with the glass used 
in later times, is remarkable for its apparent solidity ; a quality 
which, without sensibly detracting from the brilliancy of the 
glass, imparts great depth and richness to its hues. Hence 
the artists of that early period were able to leave large breadths 
of glass in their pictures unincumbered, with any enamel colour 
— with which, in the mosaic style, as I have already informed 
you, the painting of the picture is performed — without incurring 
the risk of producing a weak or flimsy effect. We all are aware 
of the fact, that the shields of arms and the panel grounds, 
which in later years were so profusely adorned with diaper 
patterns, executed with the enamel brown paint, are in the works 
of this period usually left quite plain ; the artists appearing to 
rely for effect on the tone and richness of the material itself. So, 
we perceive, on examining a figure in any one of these early 
pictures, that whilst the deepest shadows are represented in the 
simplest manner by opaque lines, and the shadows in half-tint 
by a slight wash of enamel brown, the proportion of the glass 



left quite clear for the high lights is much larger than in later 
glass-paintings. That such a simple mode of execution, if applied 
to a more pellucid and watery material, must necessarily produce 
only a poor and flimsy effect, may be learnt from the modern 
copies of thirteenth-century glass. 

But without dwelling on this point, I will call your attention 
to the composition of a twelfth or thirteenth century picture, as 
of itself ensuring distinctness without the aid of any great breadth 
of shadow. This is simple enough : it consists in arranging the 
figures in one line, usually as a bar crossing the picture ; in 
keeping the action of the figures as much as possible in the 
direction of the plane of the picture, and in insulating and 
separating the figures by the ground of the picture — a treatment, 
as you perceive, corresponding with that of an antique bas-relief. 
And since this treatment is in general more intelligibly carried 
out in the earlier examples, I think we may venture to ascribe 
it to the fuller influence of classical art at an early period of 
glass-painting. In addition to this, as a general rule, the 
colouring of the figures is kept lighter than that of the ground 
of the panel. Of course these remarks are derived froni an 
examination of a great many examples. I mention this, because 
I could easily contradict almost every one of them by a reference 
to particular works. It is from a majority of specimens only 
that a general principle is to be collected. The subjects to which 
I have just alluded are necessarily characterised by a certain 
archaic formality, arising from the stiffness of the colouring, and 
the simplicity of the design and execution. 

I have now to direct your attention to subjects of another class, 
as remarkable for their pictorial effect. I mean the picture 
glass-paintings of the first half, or, more correctly, of the second 
quarter of the sixteenth century. These works are in many 
respects the very opposites to those just described. Their 
coloming is harmonious rather than deep, and they are highly 
finished — peculiarities which I could show to be connected with 
the nature of the glass employed in these works, which, without 
being as flimsy and pellucid as ordinary modern glass, is yet 
very inferior in depth and richness to that of the twelfth and 
thirteenth centuries. Still these works will be found to comply 
with the conditions of the mosaic method, after making allowance 
for their different nature, equally with the works of the twelfth 
and thirteenth centuries ; and I hope I shall be able to prove 
that they are entitled to equal estimation. Their composition 
is various, consisting sometimes, as in the pictures of the twelfth 


and thirteenth centuries, only of a line of figures occupying a 
single plane; but more commonly of a group — of foreground 
figures, it is true, but which in parts recede from the eye : the 
figures not unfrequently occupying in plan the arc of a semi- 
circle, as in some of Raphael's designs ; and beyond the figures 
some distant object is usually represented, such as the sky, or a 
landscape. The picture, therefore, is designed on the principle 
of representing depth, and, in the best examples, is executed in 
such a manner as to produce the effect of depth. The means 
resorted to for this purpose are very simple. First may be 
noticed the choice of such subjects as are capable, without a 
violation of probability, of being represented in a somewhat 
severe, if not harsh manner : thus a landscape, or a sea-piece, a 
full idea of which cannot be conveyed without representing the 
graduated tints and soft outlines of nature, was never, at this 
period, selected as the 'principal subject of a glass-painting. On 
the contrary, when a landscape background is adopted, it is used 
merely as an accessory, to set off and relieve a group of fore- 
ground figures, in which all the interest of the composition 
centres. And secondly, we may remark, that all the objects in 
the picture are represented as if they were seen under the 
influence of broad sunshine ; a mode of treatment the most 
favourable, not only to a display of bright lights and sharp 
decided shadows, but to the general transparency of the picture, 
it being possible by this means to separate the various objects 
from each other, without having recourse to extensive masses of 
shadow or concentration of light, the use of which, however 
effective in the works of Rembrandt and other oil-painters, is 
wholly unsuited to the conditions of glass-painting, on account 
of its very limited scale of transparent shade. The heaviness 
resulting from the adoption of the opposite principle of concen- 
trating the light in the middle of the picture and keeping the 
rest in comparative obscurity, is shown in the upper subject of 
the west window of New College Chapel, Oxford, and in the west 
window of 3Iagdalen College Chapel, and in a variety of modern 
works ; and the superiority of the sunshine principle becomes 
apparent on comparing these works with others in which it is 
adopted, as the windows of the North Chapel of Brussels 
Cathedral, those of St. Jacques Church, Liege, or the windows 
of Lichfield Cathedral. 

A glance at the drawings on the wall, of portions of the glass 
at Brussels and Lichfield, will explain my meaning better than 
any words I can enrplov. We there see that the figures are cut 



out from the background, and the architecture from the sky or 
landscape, as much by the opposition of light and shade as by 
the local colours ; and thus the crispness and clearness of a sun- 
shine effect is not only highly conducive to the brilliancy of the 
window, but is most favourable to the concealment of the leads, 
which form part of and are wholly lost in the sharply defined 
shadows with which the foreground objects are bounded, and 
even in the background are, on a close view, not unfrequently 
absorbed in the colouring, but at all events pass unobserved in 
the general crispness of the picture, when it is viewed from the 
proper distance. Of course I am not speaking of the broad 
modern lead used in repairs of old glass, but of the ancient leads 
themselves, which never, until almost the beginning of the 
seventeenth century, exceeded three-sixteenths of an inch in 
width. In cinque-cento glass-paintings, therefore, the lead-work 
forms an integral part of the design, equally as in a twelfth or 
thirteenth century picture. And these works also evince a 
thorough compliance with the mosaic system in preserving the 
translucent qualities of glass. A cinque-cento glass picture, not- 
withstanding the power of its shadows and high finish, which 
entirely save it from the charge of weakness or poverty, is still a 
brilliant and diaphanous glass picture ; owing, partly to the 
crisp treatment alluded to, partly to the care taken to leave 
considerable portions of the glass, though not such relatively 
large portions as may be seen in the works of the twelfth and 
thirteenth centuries, unencumbered with enamel brown. But 
without going further into the minutiae of the subject, I will ask 
any one accustomed to compare glass-paintings of different 
dates, whether in any so high a pictorial effect has been pro- 
duced, with so little diminution of brilliancy, as in the works of 
the second quarter of the sixteenth century. 

You will perceive that from this summary I have omitted all 
notice of glass-paintings of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. 
I have done so from a conviction that the nearest approach to an 
artistically flat style of representation is to be found in the works 
of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries ; and that the nearest 
approach to an artistically rotund style of representation is to be 
found in the works of the second quarter of the sixteenth century ; 
and that there is nothing to choose between a really flat and a 
really rotund style. At first sight there is, I admit, but little 
difference between a thirteenth-century and a fourteenth-century 
picture in point of composition ; but a closer examination 
generally brings to light various minute differences, tending to 


show, either that the artists of the fourteenth century were 
already contemplating a change from flatness to rotundity of 
representation, or that they did not strictly adhere to their pre- 
decessors' rules for ensuring distinctness in a flat style. The 
inconsistency, not unfrequently seen in works of the thirteenth 
century, of representing the figure in relief, but omitting to 
indicate the recess of the niche in which the figure is supposed 
to stand — a mistake which perhaps arose from imitating in glass 
too literally the designs of ancient goldsmith's work, where, as 
everybody knows, embossed figures are often stuck on a flat 
ground, having architectural forms drawn in outline upon it — is 
repeated and exaggerated in pictures of the nineteenth century. 
Indeed, most of the fourteenth-century groups that, according to 
the usual fashion of the day, are surmounted with shrine-work, 
look just like groups painted on flat panels, fringed by way of 
ornament with spires and crockets ; so completely does the 
apparent flatness of the canopy, rendered no doubt more con- 
spicuous by the increased elaboration of its details, correspond 
with the flatness of an ordinary panel. And the figures them- 
selves, owing partly to the increased breadth of their draperies, 
inattention to the principle of insulating them by means of the 
ground colour of the panel, and a bad selection of the colours of 
the drapery, certainly do not in general appear at a distance so 
distinct as the figures in a thirteenth-century picture. I therefore 
cannot but regard the fourteenth-century style of glass-painting 
as inferior to the thirteenth, and the fifteenth-century style as 
inferior to that of the fourteenth. The fifteenth century was 
evidently passed in the effort to get out of a flat style of repre- 
sentation into a rotund one. It is true that all the pictures of 
this period appear to be flat, but they are flat in effect only, and 
not on principle ; their flatness is the result of imbecility, not of 
design. They are designed as much on the principle of depth 
as a cinque-cento glass-painting, but they do not, like it, produce 
the effect of depth, because their designers were ignorant of the 
means of attaining the desired result. As in a cinque-cento glass- 
painting, so in one of the fifteenth century, the figures are not 
unfrequently arranged on the arc of a semicircle, and are not 
cut out or separated from each other by stiff colour. And that 
the intention was to represent depth is plain from the represen- 
tation of distant objects, of sky and landscape, coloured with 
considerable regard to the hues of nature ; but, contrary to the 
practice of the cinque-cento artists, the shadows are sometimes 
misplaced, and are always too weak; and the gradations of 


colouring, though such gradations might have been as easily 
made as in cinque-cento work, the nature of the material being 
the same in both cases, are not sufficiently attended to. Hence 
the glass-pictures of the fifteenth century, beautiful as they 
sometimes are in detail, remind one in general of an assemblage 
of court cards. They frequently produce no other effect, even at 
a moderate distance, than that of a mosaic composed of strangely- 
shaped pieces of glass of various colours. I think, therefore, that 
we may leave the works of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries 
as objects chiefly interesting to the antiquary. 

Having thus indicated, as briefly as I could, the sort of 
subjects which appear to be most suited for glass-paintings, I 
will endeavour to show what sort of glass-paintings are best 
suited for particular buildings. And here the real difficulty of 
the subject may be said to commence ; for since no example of 
contemporary glazing is to be found in any building earlier than 
the middle ages, it is only by analogy that we can arrive at the 
fitness of painted glass for classical buildings, if we rely on expe- 
rience as a guide ; and in a matter of this sort I fear there is no 
guide so trustworthy as experience. 

It will be admitted, I apprehend, that the earlier Gothic 
styles are more severe in their architectural character than the 
later ones ; and I think that you will likewise admit, on reflec- 
tion, that the glass most in harmony with Gothic buildings in 
the Norman or Early English styles is that of the twelfth and 
thirteenth centuries. I have tried for a long time past to dis- 
cover the reason of this conformity, and have arrived at the 
conclusion that the harmony between the painted windows and 
the architecture depends far more on the colouring of the 
windows than on their design. I have often contemplated the 
general effect of thirteenth century, of fifteenth century, and 
even of sixteenth century painted glass, in the windows of a 
Norman or Early English building, from a distance too great for 
admitting of my making out the design with any degree of 
distinctness, and have invariably observed that the colouring 
of the earlier glass most accorded with the character of the 
architecture, and that the harmony was the same, whether the 
windows were almost entirely formed of white glass, like the Five 
Sisters at York, or were richly coloured, as at Bourges or Can- 
terbury. As might have been expected, I have not met with 
the same opportunities of contrasting the effect of thirteenth- 
century painted glass with that of the fifteenth or sixteenth 
century, in reference to its harmonv with the architecture of the 


sixteenth century, but such experiments as I have been able to 
make have tended to create an impression on my mind, that the 
glass-paintings of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries do har- 
monise more completely with the character of the architecture 
of the fifteenth century than the glass-paintings of the thirteenth. 
However, without pressing the last point, I will venture to 
express a firm belief that the colouring of a sixteenth-century 
glass-painting does harmonise better with the character of a 
building in the Benaissance style than that of a thirteenth- 
century glass-painting. 

In these conclusions I would beg you to observe that I have 
been influenced by the general effect of the glass-painting, rather 
than by its force, because I have remarked that good cinque-cento 
glass-paintings, which are hardly if at all inferior in power to 
Early English ones, do not in general harmonise with thirteenth 
century buildings so completely as the windows of the thirteenth 
-century. The inference I draw from these experiments is, that 
there is an analogy between the colouring of twelfth and thir- 
teenth century windows, and buildings remarkable for the gravity 
and solemnity of their appearance. And this, when the nature 
of the colouring of these windows is analysed, will I think be 
found to accord with Sir Joshua Eeynolds's views. He says in 
his fourth Discourse, " With respect to colouring, though it may 
appear at first a part of painting merely mechanical, yet it still 
has its rules, and those grounded on that presiding principle 
which regulates both the great and the little in the study of the 
painter, By this the first effect of the picture is produced, and 
as this is performed, the spectator, as he walks the gallery, will 
stop or pass along. To give a general air of grandeur at first 
view, all trifling or artful play of little lights, or an attention to 
a variety of tints, is to be avoided. A quietness and simplicity 
must reign over the whole work, to which a breadth of uniform 
and simple colour will very much contribute. Grandeur of 
effect is produced by two different ways, which seem entirely 
opposed to each other. One is by reducing the colours to little 
more than chiaro-oscuro, which was the practice of the Bolognian 
schools, and the other by making the colours very distinct and 
forcible, such as we see in those of Koine and Florence. But 
still the presiding principle of both those manners is simplicity. 
Certainly nothing can be more simple than monotony : and the 
distinct blue, red, and yellow colours which we see in the dra- 
peries of the Boman and Florentine schools, though they have 
not that kind of harmony which is produced by a variety of 


broken and transparent colours, have that effect of grandeur 
which was intended. Perhaps these distinct colours strike the 
mind more forcibly, from there not being any great union 
between them ; as martial music, which is intended to rouse the 
nobler passions, has its effect from the sudden and strongly 
marked transitions from one note to another, which that style of 
music requires ; whilst in that which is intended to move the 
softer passions, the notes imperceptibly melt into one another." 
Now if we compare the colouring of a thirteenth-century glass- 
painting with that of a cinque-cento one, we perceive that the 
colouring of the former consists of an assemblage of powerful, 
distinct, positive tints, skilfully arranged, but more on the simple 
principle of a mosaic than on the more blended principle of a 
painting, whilst the tints of the latter are less forcible, less 
decided, and more blended together. I have seen some cinque- 
cento glass-pictures in which there is no red, and but little 
positive blue, the colouring being almost entirely composed of 
secondary tints, and in which the transition from one tint to 
another is scarcely more marked or sudden than is the case in 
some of Titian's pictures. These considerations may perhaps be 
sufficient of themselves to justify the opinion that the colouring 
of an Early English glass-painting is more calculated to produce 
a grave and solemn effect than that of a cinque-cento one ; but 
in acceding to this opinion we ought not to overlook the fact, 
that the tone of colour of an Early English glass-painting is cool, 
and that the tone of colour of a cinque-cento glass-painting is 
warm, and that a cool tone of colour of itself has a tendency to 
produce a grave effect, and a warm tone to produce a gay effect. 
If these views are correct, it follows that we ought not only to 
continue to employ, for the windows of twelfth and thirteenth 
century buildings, glass-paintings similar to those of the twelfth 
and thirteenth centuries, as regards the tone and principle of the 
colouring, but that we ought to glaze in a similar manner the 
windows of all other buildings which can be said to possess an 
air of gravity and solemnity equal to that of a twelfth or thir- 
teenth century building : using of course weaker colours, warmer 
tones, and a more elaborate mode of execution for the windows 
of buildings in a less severe style. Some people are of opinion 
that in no style but the Gothic can so solemn an effect be 
produced ; but it seems to me that the solemn character of a 
building depends rather on its plan and arrangement than on the 
style of its details. A Norman cathedral is as solemn as a 
Gothic one, and parts of the Colosseum at Rome are, I am told, 


as gloomy and solemn as the aisles of a Norman building. The 
rule therefore might well apply to certain ecclesiastical buildings 
in the Roman style of architecture, and I see no reason why it 
should not equally apply to certain ecclesiastical buildings in 
the Greek style ; certainly these buildings, owing to the sim- 
plicity of their plan, do not possess the gloomy effect of a Gothic 
cathedral, but the extreme severity of the architecture imparts 
to them an air of gravity and solemnity which I apprehend is 
rarely equalled by a twelfth or thirteenth century building of 
corresponding dimensions. 

I am quite aware that the employment of rich and deep 
colouring in windows has a tendency to diminish the apparent 
size of a building, and I am ready to admit that it is to a fear of 
producing this result that we may attribute the modern practice 
of decorating the windows of a Greek building with glass too 
faint in its hues to rescue it from the imputation of washiness. 
But it is by no means necessary to go into the opposite extreme. 
A glass-painting entirely composed of white glass would har- 
monise with the character of Greek architecture equally as well 
as one principally composed of coloured glass, provided that the 
white glass was, like that of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, 
solid in appearance, and had a rich cool tone. And even when 
the employment of a larger proportion of coloured glass might 
. be desirable, it would always be possible to make the window 
recede from the eye, by using in it a predominating quantity of 
blue and white. But whether the advocates for powerfully 
coloured, or for white windows, as being most in keeping with 
the character of a Greek building, are right, I trust that all will 
agree in preferring rich tints to poor ones. Had the ancient 
Greeks glazed their windows, we may be certain that they would 
have used glass of rich tint, whether it was white or whether it 
was coloured. For amongst all the ancient Greek glass vessels 
that I have examined, I have never met with any of a poor tint 
or flimsy appearance in point of colour or texture of the glass. 
And indeed so closely does the glass composing these remains 
resemble in its appearance and chemical analysis the window- 
glass of the twelfth century (from which that of the thirteenth 
differs but little), that were I desirous of forming an idea of what 
Greek window-glass would have been like, I should endeavour 
to call to recollection the tints of Suger's glass at St. Denys, or 
that of the glass in the w r est triplet of Chartres. And besides, 
the remains of strong colour used in the decoration of ancient 
Greek buildings leads to the inference that the ancients, had 


they used window-glass at all, would have employed that pos- 
sessing a rich tint, from choice as well as necessity. We are still 
less without authority to guide us in regard to the design for 
windows proper for ecclesiastical buildings in the Greek or 
Roman style of architecture. 

The views I have expressed with reference to the colouring of 
these windows must confine me to an advocacy of a simrjle flat 
system of representation, because pictures composed on the 
principle of representing depth cannot properly be executed in 
glass entirely consisting of strong rich tints. The only attempt 
I have hitherto seen at designing windows for a Greek building 
is at the Church of St. Vincent de Paul at Paris. But however 
worthy of notice these windows may be as an embodiment of a 
new idea, they are neither sufficiently delicate in design, nor 
simple in execution, to serve as models for our imitation. It is 
very possible that this defectiveness may be in a great measure 
attributable to the thinness and watery character of the glass of 
which they are composed, and to the efforts of the artist to dis- 
guise the badness of the material by a more elaborate execution ; 
but such expedients are no longer necessary, since, as I have 
before informed you, 1 the manufacture of twelfth-century glass 
has been revived. This I have always considered the more 
fortunate, on account of the use that might be made of it in the 
embellishment of classical architecture, consistently with which, , 
unlike the Gothic, art may be fully developed. 

There can be no doubt that valuable hints might be derived 
from an examination of the designs of ancient sculpture, and 
even of tessellated pavement. Indeed, classical designs, admirably 
adapted for glass-paintings, are engraved from sculpture in 
Pistolesi's ' Vatican ; ' the most remarkable one is given in the 
second volume, plate 3. 2 These designs consist of figures and 
ornaments in one plane, and therefore, if executed in glass, as 1 
have recommended, would a good deal resemble some of the 
works of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. These mediaeval 
works must appear to the most careless observer to be defective 
in many respects, particularly in relief. When viewed closely, 
the intention of the artist to bring out the various projections of 
the figure and drapery, by means of strong black lines, is often 

1 See paper 'On a revived Manu- tions. (P. 175 of the present volume.) 
facture of Coloured Glass used in ancient 2 ' II Vaticauo descritto et illustrate) 

Windows,' read at the Ordinary General da Erasnio Pistolesi,' Roma, 1829; see 

Meeting of the Institute, 14th June, also vol. v. plate 81, and vol. ii. plate 4. 
1852, and published in the Transac- 


admirable, especially as seen in the heads of the figures; but, 
sometimes from want of boldness, sometimes from a want of 
knowledge were to place the shadow, Early English figures in 
glass, when viewed from a little distance, are too apt to appear 
like flat surfaces ; quite as flat as, if not more flat than, the men 
and horses appear to be in those copies of the inner frieze of the 
Parthenon, which, placed in situations distant from the eye, and 
exposed to the influence of full light, are used to decorate the 
outsides of some of our public buildings. 

I am far from agreeing with those who contend that no greater 
relief ought to be imparted to a simple flat glass-painting than 
is given to those flat relievi from the cella of the Parthenon. 
For those who urge such views seem to have entirely overlooked 
the original situation of these relievi, placed where no direct 
light could reach them. To use the words of one of our most 
accomplished artists : " it is a great mistake to suppose that the 
flat style of relief was intended to appear flat ; and it is a great 
mistake to apply it in situations, as in the open air, where it 
must appear so, and be indistinct besides." l In accordance with 
this authority, I will venture to say that quite as much relief 
ought to be given to the figures in the simplest and flattest glass- 
painting, as is given to the alti-relievi in the metopes of the 
Parthenon, which were intended to be seen in the open air, and 
from a distance. I throw out these observations, however, rather 
with reference to those who may be about to design simple flat 
glass-paintings for mediaeval buildings. For since I am perfectly 
sure that none but first-rate artists can design windows fit for 
classical buildings, I may well be content to leave the matter 
entirely in their hands ; and can only express my surprise that 
a field so favourable to a display of the highest art should have 
been so long neglected. Flaxman's labours sufficiently show the 
possibility of employing the exquisite language of the ancients 
to express true Christian sentiment ; and some of his choicest 
designs might advantageously be reproduced in painted windows 
for classical buildings, were it only by way of proving to the 
public what works of art painted windows might become in com- 
petent hands. 

I shall trouble you with but few remarks on the selection 
of glass-paintings for buildings in the Palladian style of architec- 
ture, in which I would include all Wren's churches, and even 

1 'Contributions to the Literature of the Fine Aits,' by Sir Charles Eastlake. 
Pies. R.A. r p. 104. 


St. Paul's itself; for though that building has iu parts a Roman 
severity, its interior in particular, bears many marks of the taste 
of the seventeenth century, especially in the ornamental details. 
Such buildings, taken on the whole, are less severe in character 
than true Roman or Grecian buildings, and therefore would 
seem to require a corresponding relaxation in the character of 
their painted windows. In my opinion, no greater mistake is 
committed than when a stiff Byzantine style of decoration is 
applied to the windows of a Palladian building. I have 
heard it defended on the ground that, since such glass would 
harmonise with the character of a Roman building, it ought 
equally to harmonise with the character of a Palladian one, 
because both styles of architecture have a common origin — in 
the old Roman : an argument which is at once disposed of by 
this remark, that the Romanesque style betrays its more im- 
rnediate origin in the Greek character of its ornaments, and 
some of its mouldings, from which character the Palladian is 
free. I have also heard it defended on the supposed necessity 
of imparting a more religious air to a Palladian church. But 
surely there must be other and more legitimate ways of 
increasing the solemnity of a building, than by the introduction 
of incongruous ornaments and decorations, which oppress the 
architecture by their severity. Who would think of encrusting 
the walls of St. Paul's Cathedral with stiff Byzantine mosaics ? 
I believe that it is amongst the works of the cinque-cento period 
that the true models for painted windows suitable for Palladian 
churches are to be sought. Amongst these works, as has been 
remarked, many varieties of design and character may be seen. 
Some are more solemn and grave than others, but the blended 
and comparatively undecided colouring of even the most simple 
renders them less solemn and severe than the ordinary works of 
the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. In most matters of detail 
also, cinque-cento glass-paintings accord with Palladian architec- 
ture. So that, on the whole, the cinque-cento style of glass-jDainting, 
as developed in its best specimens, seems more suited than any 
other known style for the windows of Palladian buildings. 

In adopting this style, the glass-painter, as before stated, is by 
no means confined to the use of pictures having receding back- 
grounds, but may use as flat a composition as a line of well- 
relieved figures, placed in front of a sheet of tapestry ; or even, 
in small works, or in the accessory parts of greater works, he 
would find authority for the employment of well-relieved figures 
on perfectly fiat-coloured grounds. The use of receding pictures 


in painted glass in any building, of any style, lias however been 
strenuously objected to ; and the present seems a good oppor- 
tunity of inquiring a little into the validity of the objection. 

It proceeds, as far as I can understand, on two grounds — the 
first being, the supposed unfitness of the material for any sort of 
representation more pictorial than the mosaics of the twelfth and 
thirteenth centuries ; the second, the supposed impropriety of 
representing a receding picture on the wall of any building. In 
support of the first ground of objection, we are told that a glass- 
painting reverses the conditions of nature, by making the lights 
transparent, and the shadows opaque ; that the violence of its 
colouring is wholly opposed to pictorial effect, and that to bound 
objects with black lines is reprehensible on every artistic con- 
sideration. The first of these arguments is at once disposed of 
by the observation, that we have nothing to do with anything 
but the effect of a glass-painting ; and that when the material is, 
like that of the cinque-cento period, of a horn-like texture, the 
high lights do not appear to be less solid than the shadows. 

With regard to the two other objections, I admit that they 
would be unanswerable if it were true that an artist was pre- 
cluded from painting a picture under any other than the most 
favourable conditions. But to assert this would be to fly in the 
face of all authority — and what is worse, to contradict all 
experience. According to such a rule, Raphael was blameable 
for making designs, such as the Cartoons, to be worked in 
tapestry — " a mode of representation/' says Sir Charles Eastlake, 
" which in the early part of the sixteenth century was far from 
exhibiting even the comparative force of colour, and light, and 
shade, which it afterwards attained." He should, according to 
the above rule, have condescended to no means of representation 
less complete than what oil-painting affords. Nevertheless, his 
availing himself of such restricted means of representation, 
which doubtless was imposed on him by some necessary con- 
dition, so far from being made a matter of imputation, has but 
increased the reputation of the artist. To use again the words 
of Sir Charles Eastlake, — whose admirable ' Essay on the Styles 
and Methods of Painting ' should be carefully read by those who 
interest themselves in glass-painting, — " With a view to such 
faint transcripts (the tapestries) the great artist worked. He 
knew that his drawings would be transferred to them, and that 
in the tapestries alone, possibly, his designs might live. Dis- 
tinctness was nevertheless attained without any sacrifice of such 
of the proper attributes of painting as were compatible with the 


means employed, and without any violation of probability. 
When we consider the great qualities which were combined with 
these requisites, — when we find that such apparently unpromising 
conditions had the effect of raising even Raphael above himself, 
we can hardly refuse to admit, that a due employment of limited 
means of representation may at least invite attention to the most 
important attributes of art." 1 Unless therefore the conditions 
of glass-painting are so opposed to pictorial effect as to render 
the attempt to produce it nugatory, I can see no possible reason 
for an artist declining to fill the windows of a building with 
pictures in which the art of representation is carried further 
than in the glass-paintings of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. 
In many cases it might be extremely desirable that he should do 
so — for there are subjects, very proper to be represented in 
places of worship, which are either wholly incapable of repre- 
sentation in a simple flat style, or, when attempted to be so 
represented, only prove how easily the line which separates 
sublimity from absurdity may be overstepped. But when 
pictures in painted glass, representing receding objects, actually 
do exist, in the contemplation of which we forget the limited 
means the artist had at command, and in which excellences 
are discovered such as are unattainable except in a painted 
window, the ground of objection to which I have addressed 
myself appears to fail altogether. 

The remaining objection, that it is wrong to represent a 
receding picture on the wall of a building, and consequently in 
a window, the glazed surface of which is but a continuance of 
that wall — seems to rest less on a consideration of facts, or the 
dictates of our external senses, than on a sort of mock philosophy, 
which seeks to escape laborious investigation by the enunciation 
of a " principle " — than which, by the way, nothing is more easy. 
It may be conceded that to carry a receding picture all round a 
room produces an ill effect. But pictures, though representing 
the effect of depth and distance even almost to illusion, are 
admitted to be allowable, provided they occupy only a portion 
of the wall, either by being hung against it in a frame, or by 
being actually painted upon it, — the latter sort indeed can plead 
the testimony of ages in its favour. If then a glass-painting 
should have the illusion of distance, it would be unobjectionable, — 
because, necessarily, it could occupy only part of the side of the 

' ' Contributions to the Literature of the Fine Arts/ by Sir Charles Eastlake, 


room or building containing it. And as we are accustomed to 
see out of a building by looking through its windows, those who 
mistook the painting for a real object might easily stretch the 
imagination a little further, and conclude that it was some object 
placed outside the building, until its unreality became apparent 
from the figures continuing to remain motionless. But, in truth, 
I suspect that no one ever mistook the representation of any 
object in a painted window, not even a landscape, for the reality, 
or, except whilst his attention was exclusively devoted to the 
painting, imagined that his view extended beyond the limits of 
the building : a feeling which for the moment might be equally 
excited by the contemplation of a picture hung in a frame 
against the wall. The instant the glass-painting was regarded 
with reference to the building, it would be perceived to be 
nothing else than a coloured superficies, whose plane lay in the 
same direction with that of the wall in which it was inserted. 
It might indeed sometimes happen that, for the sake of pre- 
serving distinctness at a very great distance, a glass-painting, in 
which figures were represented on a flat ground, would be pre- 
ferable to one having a receding background. But I think that 
the glass-painter need be deterred by no other consideration 
from employing a receding design, if he thought proper. Indeed, 
a glass-painting having a sky or landscape background, such as 
we meet with in good cinque-cento examples in general, would 
be peculiarly suitable for a window at the end of a building, on 
account of the retiring nature of most of its hues. I conclude 
therefore that in the preparation of painted windows for classical 
edifices, the artist has the choice of a more or less severe style 
of representation, to be used according to the character of the 
building he is required to decorate ; and that the type of the one 
style is to be found in the remains of twelfth and thirteenth 
century mosaics, and that the type of the other is to be found 
in the glass-paintings of the second quarter of the sixteenth 
century. The artist might, I apprehend, be guided by similar 
principles in preparing painted windows for buildings in the 
Gothic styles. 

I have already stated my belief that the glass-paintings of 
the twelfth and thirteenth centuries are most in harmony with the 
architecture of those respective periods, and therefore think that 
such of those works as most consistently carry out the simple 
flat style of representation ought to be regarded, with but few 
exceptions, not indeed as objects to be reproduced in copies, but 
as guides to assist the artist in forming new and original designs. 
The principle of an ancient composition might be more strictly 


adhered to now than at any former period, on account of the 
revived manufacture of the window-glass of the twelfth century ; 
but this recommendation by no means would involve the 
necessity of copying the object itself. Indeed, nothing is more 
thoroughly opposed to sound sense and good taste than a mere 
servile copy of an ancient glass-painting, or a copy with such 
trifling modifications as to be little else than a servile copy. If 
intended as a counterfeit, it must fail in its object — for none but 
the inexperienced are likely to be deceived by it — and once 
known to be a counterfeit, it would lose all interest from associa- 
tion with by-gone ages. If intended to pass for nothing more 
than a copy, under the bona fide impression that nothing except 
a copy of ancient painted glass will harmonise with Gothic 
architecture, it serves but as a cover for indolence — it can 
advance nothing, because a copy is sure to fall short of the 
original in all real merit ; and besides this, its production 
amounts to an unconscious satire on Gothic architecture, when 
we consider the imperfect state of the art of representation as 
displayed in ancient windows. The only true course is to treat 
every modern work in painted glass as an original work of the 
nineteenth century, — and as such, to test it according to intelli- 
gible rules of taste. The inquiry ought no longer to be confined to 
the narrow issue of conformity with some ancient authority, but 
should extend to a consideration of its intrinsic merit as a w T ork 
of art, and its extrinsic merit as being in harmony with the 
architecture with which it is associated. To prescribe so wide a 
field of inquiry might, indeed, prove inconvenient to certain 
critics, but would certainly tend to a more zealous investigation 
of the principles of ancient art than heretofore, and to the pro- 
duction of works more worthy of the nineteenth century : in short, 
it is by this means only that any progress can be made. 

A nineteenth-century window, designed for a twelfth or 
thirteenth century building, ought not only to harmonise with 
the architecture in the quality and treatment of its colouring, 
but. besides restraining conventionality within due bounds, 
should likewise be free not merely from the bad drawing, 
but from the quaint and contorted attitudes of the figures 
of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries ; attitudes which, how- 
ever fashionable they might have been at that period, are 
shocking to our present tastes and feelings. It should, in fact, 
reproduce nothing but the art of that period, the genuine- 
ness of which will only appear the plainer, when the film of bad 
taste and deformity is stripped from it, through which we are 
now obliged to penetrate before we can fairly see it. I should 


add that, in designing a window for a twelfth-century building, 
the artist can never do wrong in going at once to the fountain 
head, and correcting his taste by the remains of classical art, 
whose influence is so easily recognised in the glass-paintings of 
the 12th and 13th centuries. 

A consideration of the colouring best suited for the windows 
of a fourteenth-century building presents an interesting subject 
of inquiry, but into this I cannot, for Avant of time, particularly 

The glazing of the fourteenth century, until about the year 1380, 
in respect of the quality and disposition of its colouring, holds in 
general a sort of middle place between the rich mosaics of the 
thirteenth century and the paler picture glass-paintings of the 
fifteenth ; its individual colours being as cool, and almost, if not 
quite, as powerful as those of the thirteenth century, but being 
intermixed with a much larger proportion of white glass, and used 
in broader masses. But this difference in the character of the 
colouring seems attributable rather to the nature of the designs 
which became fashionable in the fourteenth century, than to any 
definite abstract principle. But however this may be, there is one 
lesson to be learnt from the works of the fourteenth century, if 
not from those of the latter part of the thirteenth, which is — that 
the glazing which chiefly consists of white glass is more favour- 
able to the effect of window tracery than that which consists of 
a mass of intensely rich colours. For the latter tends to confuse 
the tracery, unless indeed the direction of the principal lines of 
the glass composition are strongly opposed to the lines of the 
stonework, in which case there is a sufficient contrast between 
the stone tracery and the deep-coloured glass to render the 
former perfectly distinct. Thus the mullions and tracery come 
out strongly in some of the clearstory windows at Bourges, and 
in the windows of York Chapter-house, where the glazing is 
principally white ; but are not so easily made out in the windows 
of the Sainte-Chapelle at Paris, which are filled with richly 
coloured glass. On the other hand, the mullions of the southern 
rose at Chartres, which is likewise filled with richly coloured 
mosaics, show themselves distinctly — as appears from the diagram 
I now exhibit. Here the principal lines of the stonework diverge, 
like rays, from the centre of the window, whilst the principal 
lines of the glass composition form concentric cii'cles; the star- 
like effect of this, and many other rose windows of the thirteenth 
century (the north rose of Notre-Dame, at Paris, is another 
example), thus being produced by the opposition of two distinct 



designs, — one of which, the stone design, appears as if it were 
laid upon the other. If tin's consideration should lead to the 
conclusion that glazing principally consisting of white glass is 
best suited for the windows of buildings in the Decorated style of 
architecture, there can be little doubt, I apprehend, that the 
best designs would be those consisting of pattern-work painted 
on white glass, of which there are numerous and beautiful 
examples in the Cathedrals of York and Exeter, Merton Chapel, 
Oxford, and other places, with or without the enrichment of 
inserted panels, containing groups, or single figures, on stiff- 
coloured grounds, executed in the simple flat style before 
mentioned. I would on no account advocate the use of figures 
and canopies, because the stiff character of the colouring, which 
does not materially differ from that of the thirteenth century, is 
unfavourable to such a display of light and shade as is necessary 
to make the canopies seem as if they projected forward. I have 
heard the flatness of Decorated figures and canopies defended on 
the score of their resemblance to some of the published outlines 
of the German engraver Eetch ; but these outlines are only 
intended for near inspection, by which alone the varying thick- 
ness of the outline, which produces the effect of light and shade, 
can be appreciated. At a distance these designs would, of 
course, be invisible ; or if enlarged in painted glass, as I have 
also heard recommended, would appear flat and thin — just as a 
copy of a fourteenth-century monumental brass would look if 
executed in painted glass. 

The change in the nature of the material in 1380, or thereabouts, 
and the substitution of glass such as we see used in the works of 
the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, for the deep intense tints 
previously employed, is, like many other points connected with 
the history of an art, one on which no light has hitherto been 
thrown. It is but a conjecture that the change was brought about 
by the glass-makers in Germany. But I think we may conclude, 
from the fact that glass-painting was becoming more pictorial 
just before the change in the material, and that it became still 
more pictorial after it, that the lowering of the different tints in 
depth was intended to second the efforts of the artist to produce 
glass pictures in preference to glass mosaics. 

One is tempted to infer the existence of some harmony 
between the character of the architecture and the delicate tints 
and silvery tone of the glass of the fifteenth century, from their 
having been so long associated together* And, in one respect, 
the glass is no doubt well suited to the architecture; fur even 


the most elaborately painted window is, owing to the lightness 
of its hues, never confused with the stonework. And experience 
has abundantly shown that the effective pictures of the sixteenth 
century harmonize as well with the architecture of the fifteenth 
as the imperfect productions of that period. There is no apparent 
difference between the architecture of the windows of Fairford 
Church, Gloucestershire, and that of the windows of churches 
quite half a century earlier ; and yet the sixteenth-century glass, 
with which these windows are filled, is in perfect harmony with 
the character of the building. I therefore think that windows 
for fifteenth-century buildings should be designed on the model 
of the glass-paintings of the sixteenth century ; in which case 
the artist might consistently employ canopies, if he thought 
proper. The most splendid Gothic canopies in glass that I have 
ever seen, are in two of the windows of Munich Cathedral ; one is 
dated in 1503. These canopies are so painted as to appear like 
what they profess to be — hollow niches. 

As a general rule it appears more satisfactory that one scale 
of figures should be preserved throughout a window, than that 
the size of the figures should be regulated by the sizes of the 
lights they occupy ; as in most Gothic examples. In the cinque- 
cento period the uniformity of scale was preserved, not un- 
frequently, by the employment of angel boys, instead of full- 
grown figures, to fill the smaller tracery lights. At Fairford, 
and other places, the expedient adopted is the use of demi-figures 
in the tracery lights. 

In the fifteenth as well as in the sixteenth century it was 
a not uncommon practice to extend the design of a glass- 
painting beyond the limits of a single light. In some instances 
the entire window is filled with a single picture, which is spread 
over the whole opening, independently of the mullions. So 
great an outcry has however been raised against this practice, 
that it seems worth while to say a few words in justification of 
it. In the first place, there is not, I conceive, a greater violation 
of principle committed in laying as it were the design of per- 
pendicular tracery-work over the design of a fifteenth-century 
picture in glass, than is committed in laying the design of a 
thirteenth-century rose window over the design of its glazing. 
The stonework of the window sustains no injury of effect ; on the 
contrary, it is rendered more distinct by the opposition of its 
design to that of the glass. Neither is the glass-painting injured 
by being cut by the stonework, for, as remarked by a member of 
this society on a former occasion, the force of imagination is 

r 2 


such, that the design may be preserved in all its unity through 
any number of lights : an observation which, I think, will be 
admitted to be true by those who have been in the habit of 
looking at such works with an unbiassed eye. But the practice 
may be defended on another, and perhaps less questionable, 
ground — on the score of necessity * Oar ancestors were in the 
habit of representing in their windows vast numbers of legendary 
saints ; but modern practice is in general so opposed to this, as 
in effect to limit the choice of the artist to representations of 
our Saviour, the four Evangelists, the twelve Apostles, occa- 
sionally the Virgin Mary, and some of the Prophets and 
Patriarchs. I believe that I am speaking within compass when 
I say that his choice does not extend beyond three dozen single 
figures. Consequently monotony is inevitable, unless recourse 
is had to groups of figures. Here indeed the means of selection 
is almost unlimited. Flaxman declares (Works, p. 331) that it 
may be affirmed, " without danger of exaggeration, that many 
hundred subjects are to be found in the sacred writings, which, 
being ably designed, would be new to the beholder." But in 
order to ensure a sufficient scale for the figures, the group must 
not unfrequently be extended beyond the limits of a single 
light. Upon the ground of necessity, therefore, we may well 
justify the carrying a glass-picture across a window, to a certain 
extent irrespective of the mullions. And 1 should perhaps add, 
that when we consider that painted windows by their size might 
not unfrequently offer a field for the talents of the historic 
painter, it seems unadvisable to scare artists from it by imposing 
conditions which were often broken through by the mediaeval 
painters themselves. 

In conclusion, 1 will repeat what I stated at the outset, that I 
claim no infallibility for any of the views I have advanced. 
I am conscious of having approached delicate ground more than 
once; especially in the course of my remarks on the sort of 
glass-paintings best suited for buildings in the classical styles. 
On this point I consider that I have but raised questions which 
wiser heads than mine must solve. My object will have been 
accomplished if I have added but one grain of information to the 
common stock ; or if I have succeeded in proving that there is 
no mystery in glass-painting, that it is a branch of the Fine 
Arts distinguished from others only by certain conditions, and 
that the same sober rules of criticism equally apply to the pro- 
ductions of the glass-painter. To take a familiar instance — we 
sometimes hear it disputed whether the flesh ought to be 


coloured or loft white in a glass-painting ; the opponents of 
tinted flesh urging the impossibility of imitating nature exactly 
in this respect. The answer is obvious enough. The whole 
colouring of a glass-painting is highly conventional, whether it 
be of the draperies, of the flesh, of the sky, or of any other 
object ; still so long as it does not exceed the limits of con- 
ventionality — a point to be ascertained only by observation and 
general opinion — the eye and imagination are satisfied. We 
should be startled and disgusted at seeing flesh painted green or 
blue; but the complacency with which pink or white flesh in 
a glass-painting is regarded by the generality of mankind is a 
sufficient proof that neither of those tints contradict nature too 
violently, and therefore that the artist does not exceed the 
limits of conventionality in using either white or tinted flesh at 
his discretion. 

The wide range of this paper, and the necessity of confining 
its length within reasonable limits, have of course compelled me 
to touch on several topics in a very cursory manner ; and 
especially that relating to the actual mode of executing a glass- 
painting, on which the argument in favour of the mosaic system 
almost entirely depends. However, as I went into this subject 
at great length in a little work which I published in 1847, 1 
and of which there is a copy in your library, I must refer those 
to it who are inclined to pursue the matter further. It may 
seem superfluous to those who have read this book to assure 
you that there is a perfect consistency between it and such 
views as I have just expressed ; but, as certain writers are in the 
habit of taunting me with inconsistency, I may as well state 
that the only foundation for the charge is this : That, perceiving 
at the time when that book was written, that modern copies of 
the thirteenth-century windows, besides being very raw in colour, 
were, owing to the extreme pellucidness of the glass then in use, 
thin and poor in effect — the most favourable examples never 
having a more imposing air than a veneer of an old window 
might be expected to have — and that the process of antiquating 
the glass, that is dulling it over with the enamel brown in 
imitation of the effect of age, only produced dulness without 
imparting depth, I ventured to suggest the adoption of shadows, 
such as we see in cinquecento work, as well as a broader style of 
colouring than was used in the mosaics of the thrteenth century, 

1 ' An Inquiry into the Difference of Style observable iu Ancient Glass- 
Paintings, with Hints on Glass Painting, by an Amateur,' p. 238 at seq. 


as a means of correcting the flimsiness without destroying the 
brilliancy of the material, and at all events of giving power to 
the work ; and that, since the manufacture of the twelfth-century 
glass has been revived, I have advocated a nearer approach to 
ancient precedents, both in the execution of the painting and 
the method of its colouring. I trust this brief explanation will 
finally dispose of the charge to which I have alluded ; a charge 
which never would have been made, any more than the absurd 
misrepresentation that I have at any time recommended the 
universal employment of the cinquecento style, details and all, 
had it not been for those writers' ignorance of the subject on 
which they professed to write, and their consequent inability to 
comprehend any argument in relation to it which is founded 
on general views. To you, gentlemen, I am indebted for the 
patience with which you have listened to so long and dry a 



'Read at the Ordinary General Meeting of the Royal Institute of British Architects, 

June 16th, 1856.) 

|T may perhaps be recollected that on a former 
occasion, 1 whilst adverting to the harmonious 
agreement between ancient painted glass and 
ancient Gothic architecture, I alluded to the 
resemblance which the glass-paintings, contem- 
poraneous with the architecture of the twelfth 
century and early part of the thirteenth, bore to 
the Antique ; and thus I concluded, from their 
agreement with the architecture, that we might contrive to pro- 
duce modern glass-paintings equally in keeping with Early Gothic 
architecture, and superior to the old ones as works of art, if, instead 
of merely copying these ancient remains, or perhaps barely cor- 
recting their bad drawing, we should strive to work up to those 
models of excellence which inspired the earliest Christian artists, 
and which have been admired, and, I will venture to say, will 
be admired so long as an appreciation of beauty shall continue 
to be a faculty of the human mind, although persons may occa- 
sionally be met with who seem to have been rendered insensible 
or indifferent to their merit by a too exclusive study of the 
Mediaeval art. In the discussion which these remarks occa- 
sioned, the propriety of illustrating my views by means of a 
drawing was suggested, and I agreed to resume the subject 
whenever I was prepared with such a means of explanation. I 

1 See Proceedings of the Institute of British Architects, Session 1853-54, p. 
21. (P. 207-209 of the present volume.) 


have been prevented from fulfilling my promise earlier, but the 
delay is not to be regretted, since it has afforded me more time 
for consideration. Even now I would particularly guard myself 
against the supposition that the drawing produced pretends to 
be a perfect exponent of my views. To carry out those views as 
I desire would require far greater artistic power than I can 
command ; and therefore I must request you to regard it not by 
any means as a finished design, but simply as an explanatory 

The influence which classical antiquity exerted on the arts of 
the "West, principally through Byzantium, has been repeatedly 
insisted upon, and illustrated by modern writers. In some 
instances we are almost able to see the very track by which such 
influence was transmitted ; in others it is impossible to forbear 
ascribing much to the effect of local remains, the fruit of a 
Eoman occupation ; in either case it is difficult to discriminate 
between the work of native and foreign artists. Still, however, 
a common resemblance points to a common origin. A variety 
of causes may unite to render this resemblance more palpable 
on some occasions than on others. But the wider the ex- 
perience, the more positive is the belief in the Byzantine or 
Greek character of Western art in the twelfth and thirteenth 

From this influence ancient glass-paintings are not exempt. 
They are infected by it in the same degree as other specimens 
of pictorial art. I am sorry I cannot corroborate by docu- 
mentary evidence the opinion I have formed from the appear- 
ance of the painted glass. When and where the art of painting 
upon glass was discovered is still a matter of conjecture. The 
testimony of the earliest writer, Theophilus, by itself only shows 
that, at the time he wrote, France vras, far excellence, the 
country in which it was practised. He tells his readers that 
they will find in his book •'' all the knowledge that Greece pos- 
sesses in the kinds and mixtures of colours ; Tuscany in inlaid 
works, and the various kinds of niello ; Arabia in malleable, 
fusible, or chased work ; Italy in the various kinds of vases, and 
the carving, enriched with gold and silver, of gems and ivory ; 
France in the precious variety of ivindows ; and industrious Ger- 
many in the delicate workmanship of gold, silver, copper, iron, 
wood, and stones." The Abbe Texier indeed— the author to 
whom I have had the most resort, because his inquiries are the 
most germane to my own pursuits — considers it probable that 


the honour of the discovery is due to the Limoges school of 
artists ; ' and though his chief reason, the similarity of the process 
of enamelling to that of glass-painting, of itself is entitled to little 
weight, especially if the opinion be correct that Germany shared 
with Limoges the manufacture of enamelled ware, the leaning 
of my mind, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, is 
in favour of his opinion. Our not finding any specimens of 
painted glass earlier than the twelfth century or the end of the 
eleventh, and these nowhere except in France — so far, at least, 
as I am aware of — affords a presumption that earlier specimens 
never existed, and that the commencement of the manufacture 
was in France. And I have long been of opinion that the glass 
used in the earliest glass-paintings was made from Greek or 
Byzantine recipes, on account of its being so similar in texture 
and colour to the ancient Greek glass. Therefore (without, 
however, necessarily committing ourselves to the opinion that 
the art was discovered in France) I think we may safely con- 
clude that it was discovered in Western Europe by some school 
of artists under Byzantine influence. Indeed, the very badness 
of the figure-drawing in the earliest examples, as compared with 
the excellence of the foliaged ornaments — and which, therefore, 
cannot be attributed, as in the case of the earliest Enamels, to 
any peculiar difficulty in the manufacture — is an argument in 
favour of the discovery being made by a school of artists as yet 
immature, such as a provincial scbool might be considered in 
comparison with that of Byzantium. And by way of accounting 
for the spread and intensity of Byzantine influence in France, I 
may mention, on the authority of M. Texier, that as early as 979 
a Venetian colony was settled at Limoges, for the purpose of 
trading with the spices and other commodities of the East, con- 
veyed from Egypt by way of Marseilles. Mr. Fergusson, in his 
very useful Handbook, 2 corroborates the supposition that it was 
with Alexandria that the Venetians had their closest connexion, 
though no doubt, as the great carriers of the Levant, they were, 
at that time, in frequent communication with Byzantium. To 
what extent the Venetians imbibed the Byzantine principles of 
architecture — in some degree modified by their commerce with 
Alexandria — is seen by a reference to their great church of St. 

1 See ' Essai historique et descriptif l'Ouest. 1841,1842. Poictiers. 8vo. 

sur les Ai'gentiers et les Emailleurs de 2 'The Illustrated Handbook of A rchi- 

Limoges, par M. l'Abbe Texier, Cure tecture, by James Fergusson, M.R.I. B .A.' 

d'Auriat.' Published in the Meinoires 2 vols. Murray. 1855. 
of the Societe des Antiquaires de 


Mark (a building remarkable, according to Mr. Fergusson, for 
being the only real specimen of Byzantine architecture within 
the limits of the Western Empire) ; and the churches of St. 
Front Perigueux (the erection of which is ascribed to the Doge 
Orseolo L, who came to sojourn in France in 978), Souillac, 
Angouleme, Cahors, Solignao, Fontevrault Abbey, Fleac, St. 
Hilary of Poictiers, and others, all at no great distance from 
Limoges, attest, in their general architectural resemblance to 
St. Mark's, how thoroughly the colony carried with it the taste 
and arts of the parent state. 

The Byzantine school, thus implanted in France, was during a 
considerable period continually having its traditions revivified 
and corrected by the influx of fresh artists and new works of art 
from the East. Greek artists, it seems, were living there in the 
thirteenth century ; and as late as 1421 an inhabitant of Limoges 
brought with him an artist to carve a resemblance of the Holy 
Sepulchre, on his return, by way of Venice, from a pilgrimage 
to Jerusalem. If, then, glass-painting were a French art, having 
its cradle in or in the neighbourhood of Limoges, we should 
expect to find its earliest remains displaying Byzantine features, 
and, if so, the features more or less strongly developed of the 
Antique ; and wheresoever the birthplace of the art may have 
been, I assert that its earlier remains do display those features. 
The most careless observer can hardly fail to be struck with 
the resemblance between the glass-paintings of towards the 
middle of the twelfth century, and the illuminations in the con- 
temporary Greek MSS., or with the frequent recurrence in them 
of Greek ornaments ; and the same general character may be 
traced in glass-paintings until quite the middle of the second 
half of the thirteenth century, when it gradually died out, before 
the increasing influence of a new style, of which the sculptures 
in the choir of Lincoln, to which Mr. Cockerell has directed our 
attention, 1 may be said to be an early and a favourable type. 
But the glass-paintings which, on the whole, most closely re- 
semble the antique are those which were executed between 
1170 and 1240, or thereabouts. I am not seeking to deny that 
these works were executed by native artists either in France or 
England ; but I cannot ascribe, as some have done, their greater 
freedom and closer likeness to good models, merely to the pro- 
gressive improvement of a school. It seems more reasonable to 
suppose that the change was in great measure caused by the 

1 Proceedings of the ArchrcoloKieal Institute at Lincoln, 1848. 


influx of Greek artists, and greater aptitude on the part of their 
pupils to profit by instruction. The draperies, instead of being 
tightly wrapped about the limbs, and scanty in their proportions, 
as in the earlier examples, are more elegant and flowing, re- 
minding one of the voluminous draperies of the Antique, which 
they resemble not only in the set, but the very form of the folds, 
betokening a material thin in texture, and, from its jniancy, 
allowing the action of the limbs to be easily seen beneath it. 
The heads, too, more nearly resemble the Antique in their con- 
tour. In one of the windows of Canterbury Cathedral, erected 
shortly after the fire in 1174 (the second window from the west, 
in the north aisle of the choir), are some heads which might 
have been copied from the old Soman. There are some similar 
ones at Lincoln, in glass, of the same date as that of the north 
rose, and now worked into it, though not belonging to it. There 
is also a strong resemblance to the Antique in the fashion of the 
garments. It is well known that the Romans had in great mea- 
sure ceased to be the gens togata (Roman os rerum dominos, 
gentemque togatam) even in the reign of the Emperor Augustus. 
The Lacerna, a cloak fastened on one shoulder with a clasp, and 
sometimes furnished with a hood, originally borrowed from the 
army, became, on account of its greater convenience, worn with 
the Tunic, as the ordinary dress of the Roman citizen ; and, by 
degrees, the Toga was reserved for state occasions. After the 
removal of the seat of empire to Constantinople, a variety of 
additional dresses were used, many of them of Greek origin ; 
the more stately of which were, with its usual tact, appropriated 
by the Church as it gathered power, and which are the founda- 
tion of the Mass vestments of the Roman clergy at this day. 
This has been clearly demonstrated by the learned Krazer, 1 
whose accuracy, though it may have been painful to the High 
Churchmen, as showing the Pagan origin of some of the most 
sacred things, has never been impugned. Some of these dresses 
were, moreover, adopted in their courts by the barbarian con- 
querors of the Roman empire, and thus were handed down to 
later times. The Dalmatic, in which the effigy of King John in 
Worcester Cathedral is clothed, is an instance, and the modern 
Peers' state-robe is another. The most popular dress amongst 
those nations who possessed themselves of the territories of the 
Empire, no doubt, was the Tunic, with or without the Lacerna, 
or a shorter cloak used by the private legionaries, called the 

Krazer <ie Liturgiis. Augsburg, 1786. 


Sagum ; and this dress, with slight modifications, appears to 
have been in actual use in the thirteenth century. The 
Mediaevals almost invariably adopted the Tunic with long 
sleeves in preference to that with short sleeves, which was the 
one usually worn by the Eomans ; and instead of the Braeeae 
and buskins of antiquity, they clothed the nether man in long- 
hose, over which they used shoes or long boots. So that, with 
the exception of the legs and arms being clothed, there is but 
little difference between an ordinary thirteenth-century figure 
copied from glass, and a figure taken from the Arch of Titus or 
Trajan's Column. The long Tunic reaching to the feet, so com- 
mon in the glass-paintings of the thirteenth century, also had 
its prototype in Imperial Borne. The figures on the Arch of 
Titus show that it was at that time often worn beneath the 
Toga. Indeed, startling as it may appear, representations of 
the Toga itself are to be found in pictures on glass of the 
thirteenth century ; and I have little doubt in my own mind 
that the mantle which, carelessly thrown over the long Tunic, 
constituted the conventional dress of prophets and of saints, not 
being ecclesiastics, throughout the middle ages, was, in fact, but 
a corruption of the Toga. 

With regard to the Ornament, it is easy by means of the 
carved ivories (of which I perceive a Catalogue by the Arundel 
Society has just been presented to this Institute) to trace the 
transition from the Classical to that used in the twelfth and 
thirteenth centuries. It is so plain that the Mediaeval artists 
borrowed their ideas from the Antique, which being so purely 
architectural and conventional is on that account I think 
the finest of all ornament, that I shall not urge the matter 
further. Indeed, the thing speaks for itself. I shall therefore 
proceed without further delay to deduce a few practical hints 
from the facts I have stated. 

The question that naturally arises is, if glass-paintings, whose 
drawing so much resembles the Antique, completely harmonize 
with the buildings of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, would 
not other glass-paintings equally harmonize with such buildings, 
whose drawing should more exactly resemble the Antique in 
point of excellence? I say in point of excellence, for I totally 
disclaim any intention of recommending the substitution of 
copies of Classical draperies or ornaments for Mediaeval ones, 
or exchanging the individual character, and strictly human, as 
opposed to God-like, expression of the countenance, which dis- 
tinguish Christian art, for the more generalized and conventional 


treatment of the Antique. I wish to see the Christian sentiment 
elevated but not obliterated by a study of the Antique, and the 
Mediaeval drapery drawn as the Mediaeval artist would have 
drawn it, had he possessed the power of the Greek. 

I am persuaded that, if the same tone of colour which we see 
in ancient glass-paintings of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries 
be adopted, all archaeological requirements will be satisfied by 
adhering to the costume of the period and general form of orna- 
ment, and preserving the individuality and character of the 
heads. Tims the attitudes of the figures, the arrangement of 
the groups, and general cast of the features, might be taken as 
closely as possible from the Antique, whilst the draperies should 
be treated as being thin in texture, voluminous, accommodated 
to the limbs, and moulded into deep simple folds. I believe 
that works executed upon this principle would often be taken 
for old ones of very superior quality. No doubt to achieve such 
works would require far higher artistic power than is generally 
now employed in glass-painting, and a vast deal more time to be 
bestowed on their preparation than is now required, all which 
would tend to increase their cost. But having confidence in 
the common sense of the country, I believe, if the matter were 
properly presented to their minds, that most patrons of glass- 
painting would prefer possessing one Picture window in a 
church, exhibiting a decent display of art, all the other windows 
being filled with good Pattern glass-paintings, instead of being 
content as now with having every window filled with the veriest 
trash under the denomination of Pictures. The present want of 
artists to execute such works is no argument against the system, 
since we may be sure that plenty of artists would come forward 
as soon as they ascertained that their services were required. If 
the system is correct, there can be no insuperable difficulty in 
working it out. 



(From the Archaeological Journal, vol. xiv. 1857.) 

HERE is no task more agreeable to the archaeo- 
logist than that of recording the preservation of 
an interesting relic of ancient art. The painted 
glass in the North Rose of Lincoln Cathedral, 
which was observed to be in an insecure state dur- 
ing the Institute's visit to Lincoln in 1848, was, 
in the course of the year before last, releaded, and 
the stonework in which it is placed reset, at the 
expense of the dean and chapter. It is impossible to speak too 
highly of the substantial character of the repair ; and as no 
"restoration" of the glass was attempted, what remains of the 
original glazing is likely to continue for many generations a 
trustworthy witness to the state of the arts at the time of its 

Having had an opportunity, during the repairs, of more closely 
examining the glass than I had before been able to do, and 
finding that my description of it in the Lincoln volume of the 
Institute's proceedings was in some respects inaccurate, I am 
induced to subjoin the following amended description, in which 
I have again availed myself of the diagram that illustrated my 
former statement. 

No. 1. This picture is in a very mutilated state. It repre- 
sents Christ. The head is youthful, but of inferior execution to 
the head of the figure in No. 16. It is adorned with a yellow 
nimbus, bearing a white cross. What remains of the figure is 
clothed in a red robe, and a white under-garment having yellow 
cuffs. The right hand is raised in benediction ; it exhibits no 
stigma. The left hand is destroyed ; it once held a book, which 
still remains. One foot is perfect ; it exhibits no stigma. The 
body of the figure, with the exception of a small fragment of 
the white dress, is destroyed. The flesh- colour of the figure is 



very deep, almost purple, as is the flesh-colour of several of the 
other figures. 

No. 2 represents three figures seated in attitudes of adoration, 
and looking towards No. 1. The first figure of the group from 
the centre of the window wears a mitre. 

No. 3. A similar subject. The group consists of a female and 
two male figures. 

No. 4. A similar subject. The group consists of three male 
figures, the first of which is mitred. 

No. 5. This picture is much mutilated. The group consists 
of three figures seated like the others. The heads are smaller 
than those of the rest of the figures, and are apparently in- 

No. 6 represents a similar subject, consisting of two male 
figures and one female. 

No. 7. A similar subject, consisting of three figures. The last 
of the group has the head of a monk ; but this is an insertion. 


No, 8. This picture is much mutilated. One figure only of 
the group remains. Part of a " Jesse " is inserted. 

No. 9. A similar subject. The group consists of three male 

No. 10. A similar subject. 

Nos. 11, &c. Eacli of these seven compartments is filled with 
painted glass collected from other windows, and mostly of a 
date somewhat earlier than that of the original glazing of the 
Eose. The subject of one of the paintings is the legend of St. 

Nos. 12, &c. Two of these four compartments contain each 
the figure of an angel swinging a thurible ; the remains of a 
similar figure occupy the third compartment; the figure of the 
fourth compartment is lost. 

No. 13. Each of these eight compartments contains, or did 
contain, a small four-leaved ornament in a circle. 

No. 14. Each of these sixteen compartments contains, or did 
contain, a white star of six wavy points, on a red ground. 

No. 15. Each of these sixteen compartments contains, or did 
contain, a red star of six wavy points, on a blue ground. 

No. 16 represents Christ sitting on a rainbow. There is a 
candle on each side of his seat. The head is youthful, is bearded, 
and adorned with a red nimbus bearing a white cross. The 
figure is draped in white and purple. The stigmata are shown 
in both the hands and the side, but not in the feet. The picture 
is enclosed in a quatrefoiled frame, or border, composed of two 
bands, the innermost purple, the outermost white, at the angles 
of which are the Evangelistic symbols, thus arranged : the 
angel and eagle at top, the lion and bull beneath. None of 
these symbols is nimbed. A symbolic disposition of colour, such 
as is partially adopted in this design, is of rare occurrence in 
painted glass. 

No. 17 represents two angels supporting the Cross, in- 
scribed, — IHC NAZABENVS. 

No. 18 represents two angels carrying the Spear ; the head 
of which is formed of a piece of ruby glass, imperfectly coloured, 
and appearing as if it were white, with a trifling smear of red. 

No. 19. Two angels, one carrying the three Nails and the 
Napkin, the other a thurible. 

No. 20. Two angels, one bearing the Crown of Thorns, the 
other a thurible. 

No. 21. St. Peter with the Keys, preceding five other figures, 
three of which besides St. Peter are nimbed. One of the figures 


is that of a female seated and crowned, but not nimbed. The 
rest are standing. 

No. 22. Seven figures seated. 

No. 23. Two angels sounding the trumpets. 

No. 24. A similar subject. 

No. 25. Part of the general Eesurrection ; the subject repre- 
sents the dead rising from their coffins. 

No. 26. This picture is an insertion ; it represents Adam 
digging, and Eve spinning. In the centre are the remains of a 
tall figure, or angel. The glass seems somewhat later than the 
original glazing of the Rose. 

Nos. 27, 28, 29. These pictures are clearly insertions. Each 
represents a bishop seated, giving the benediction. The glass 
seems somewhat later than the original glazing of the Eose. 

Nos. 30, 31. These pictures also are insertions. Each repre- 
sents an archbishop seated, giving the benediction. The glass is 
of the same date as the last three subjects. 

Amongst the fragments inserted in the North Eose are some 
trifling remains of the original glazing of the choir windows, 
which glass appears to be of the time of Edward I. 

From the above account it appears that the intention of the 
designer of the North Eose was, to represent in the central part 
of the window the Kingdom of Heaven, under the type of Christ 
seated in glory amidst the blessed (many of these figures are 
nimbed) ; and to represent in the outer series of circles the Day 
of Judgment. The circle, No. 26, doubtless contained originally 
a similar subject to that in No. 25. And the remaining five 
vacant circles, Nos. 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31, were in all proba- 
bility occupied with the Eesurrection, and its usual incidents, 
the rescuing of the Good, and the abandonment of the Bad to 
the Infernal Powers. The mode of describing a connected story 
by means of representations of its incidents arranged in sym- 
metrical order, so common in the medallion windows of the 
twelfth and thirteenth centuries, had its origin in remote anti- 
quity. It is indicated in some of the Assyrian sculptures in the 
British Museum. 

The original glazing of the North Eose consistently with its 
character would admit of a date being assigned to it as early as 
the end of the twelfth or beginning of the thirteenth century ; 
which, I believe, coincides very nearly with the date generally 
attributed to the stone-work. And it is on the whole a valuable 
specimen of the art of the period, although possessing nothing 
besides its general design which calls for particular notice. The 



colours of the glass are very fine, being rich and brilliant, and 
low in tone, as compared with those of ordinary modern glazing. 
The blue, which is not so pure, and more resembles a neutral- 
ised purple than that commonly employed in the twelfth century, 
occasionally exhibits narrow streaks of red ; by no means an 
unusual occurrence in thirteenth-century blue glass, denoting 
the presence of copper used to correct the rosy hue of the cobalt, 
some of which has unintentionally been converted into ruby 
glass. The white glass is of a sea-green tint, and the yellow 
(a pot-metal) is strongly impregnated with blue, the effect of 
the deoxidising influence of the carbon of the wood-ash used as 
an alkali, and of the smoke of the furnace, upon the iron con- 
tained in the sand, and upon the wood-ash, the constituents of 
the glass. Much of the ruby is very streaky and uneven in 
tint ; some pieces indeed when seen near are only like pieces of 
white glass streaked here and there with ruby ; although, owing 
to the intermixture of the rays of light, when seen from the floor 
of the transept, they appear as if they were of an uniform light 
red colour. Such of the ruby glass as has been painted upon, 
and therefore burnt in the glass-painter's furnace for the purpose 
of fixing the enamel — for instance, that used in the draperies — is 
usually more uniform in tint, and has a thinner coating of colour- 
ing matter than that used in the unpainted grounds : a circum- 
stance which may often be remarked in glass-paintings of the 
twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and which perhaps may be 
accounted for in the following manner. It has been proved by 
experiments that the ruby colour is produced in glass by adding 
to the materials of white glass copper in a state of protoxide, 
along with oxide of tin, and other substances having a tendency 
to deprive the copper of its oxygen, as well as oxide of iron ; 
and recent researches conducted by my friend, Mr. Clarke, have 
gone far to establish the fact, long since suspected by chemists, 
that the red colour is due to the presence of copper in the 
metallic state, very finely divided. 1 But whether it is metallic 
copper, or a precipitate of a suboxide of copper, which produces 
the ruby (the protoxide of copper only imparts a green colour), 
it is evident from inspecting a piece of streaky ruby glass that 
its colouring matter lies in several parallel planes separated from 

1 That metallic gold in a finely divided Institution,' vol. ii. p. 310. Glass 

state will produce a red colour when coloured with gold is more pink in hue 

held in a transparent medium, has been than that coloured red with copper, 

shown by Professor Faraday's esperi- The Railway night-danger signal is gene 

meuts. See ' Proceedings of the Royal rally constructed with the gold ruby. 


each other by greenish or yellowish white glass, 1 and forms thin 
strata of an elongated character, varying in breadth from an 
inch or more to a mere thread ; and that the streaky appearance 
is owing to the coloured lines in one plane lying in a different 
direction from the coloured lines in another plane, the complexity 
of the streaks being in proportion to the number of strata and 
non-coincidence of lines of colour. Tin's may be accounted for 
by supposing that the red colour occurs when the oxide of iron, 
taking the place of the suboxide of copper, or metallic copper, 
precipitates the latter ; and that, as this precipitation is irregular, 
the colour also is irregular ; and that the mechanical action 
of blowing the glass into sheets causes these irregularities to 
take a streaky form, the more complicated in proportion to the 
number of planes in which the precipitation takes place, and the 
extent to which the soft glass becomes twisted in the operation. 
The precipitation of the copper by the iron depends upon a pro- 
portion of materials in the glass, the amount of heat to which it 
is subjected, and apparently to other causes with which we are 
not yet acquainted. 

In general, the greater the length of time to which the glass 
is exposed to heat, the more the precipitation takes place, and 
the more fully is the glass coloured. 2 Those sheets of glass 
which in the manufacture show the least traces of colour, will 
therefore, in general, endure the greatest quantity of heat with- 
out becoming too dark. The thinner also the coating of 
coloured glass is, cceteris paribus, the less intense the colour will 
be. 3 It is probable that the experience of these consequences 
led the ancient glass-painters to select for the purpose of being 
painted and burnt such portions of the ruby-glass as were ascer- 
tained to have the thinnest ruby coating, in which no other 
change might in general be apprehended than the conversion 
of streaky ruby into smooth ruby, and a general though unim- 
portant increase in the depth of colour. During the twelfth 

1 Diagrams of ruby glass, seen in 3 The thinly - coated ruby of the 
section, in which the laminse of colour twelfth and thirteenth centuries, before 
are shown, are given in the ' Inquiry it is burnt, is streaky in colour, and its 
into the Difference of Style observable ruby coating when seen with the micro- 
in Ancient Glass Paintings ; by an scope is found to be filled with thin 
Amateur,' p. 22. laminae of red, like that of the thickly- 

2 Sometimes the same process will coated ruby. The streakiness of the 
convert the red glass into white glass ; thickly-coated ruby is, however, rather 
but this is perfectly consistent with more strongly marked than that of the 
what is stated in the text. thinly-coated ruby. 

Q 2 


and thirteenth centuries, and in England until about the last 
quarter of the fourteenth, glass thinly coated with ruby is com- 
paratively rare ; the great majority of specimens of ruby having 
a ruby coating of a depth varying from one-fourth to one-half 
of the thickness of the entire sheet. 1 And there can be little 
doubt that the thinly coated ruby of this period, the colouring 
matter of which is about the thickness of a sheet of stout writing 
paper, was produced by some accident in the manufacture. 

The smooth ruby which superseded the streaky in England 
about 1370, and in Germany a good deal earlier in that century, 
has a coating of colouring matter not thicker than a sheet of 
writing paper, which is almost always entirely converted into 
ruby in the first instance. This glass, therefore, either is not 
altered at all in colour, or undergoes but a very slight increase 
in depth of colour on being burnt ; and for this reason the change 
in the manufacture was probably at the time considered as an 
improvement by the English glass-painters, who were then be- 
ginning to treat paintings on glass less as mosaics, and more 
like pictures. If they had continued to practise the older system 
of designing, they would have found the new material productive 
of a flatter and tamer effect than the old streaky ruby. But the 
change in the manufacture of the material exactly suited the 
change in the style of glass-painting which, in England, took 
place nearly contemporaneously with it. Some of the German 
glass-paintings of the first half of the fourteenth century, and 
most modern glass-paintings which affect so early a style, may 
be referred to as illustrating the truth of the above remark. 

The actual painting of the glass in the North Rose, when 
compared with that of contemporary specimens, must be con- 
sidered to be rather careless than otherwise. Nevertheless, it 
is impossible not to recognise in the drawing throughout, but 
especially in the draperies, the influence of Greek art, though 
nut quite to the extent to which this is shown in the glass-paint- 
ings generally of the latter part of the twelfth century, parti- 
cularly in those which, like some examples at Canterbury, may 
be considered to be of French workmanship. It would be un- 
reasonable to suppose that the resemblance between ancient 
-works in glass and the remains of classical art is accidental. As 
Gothic architecture originated in a style borrowed from the 

1 It is to be remembered that "ruby ruby, applied during its in mufacture. 

glass" is a "coated glass," i.e. glass Such glass is not coloured by the glass- 

wbich consists of a sheet of white glass painter, 
coloured on one side with a coating of 


Roman, and worked out by Greek or Byzantine architects, and 
that of the eleventh, twelfth, and early part of the thirteenth 
centuries, is evidently an exotic, the native of a southern climate, 
we might naturally expect to meet with the same Greek feeling 
in all other decorations as is so abundantly displayed in the 
sculpture of this period. It is probably to a connection with Byzan- 
tine art that the glass-painters of the twelfth century owe their 
superiority over those of the fourteenth ; or, indeed, of any other 
time than the sixteenth. For through such connexion they 
could feel, although imperfectly, the influence of that standard 
of ideal perfection on which the art of the Greeks had the ad- 
vantage of being founded. The closeness of the connection of 
these early artists with Byzantine art, and consequently the 
more immediate influence of the latter on them, will be easily 
explained, if, as there is reason to believe, France, and Limoges 
in particular, the ascertained abode of Greek artists, and a 
place in direct communication, through Marseilles and Alex- 
andria, with Byzantium and the East, was the cradle of glass- 
painting ; although the excellence of these glass-painters may 
be partly due to the vigour of race. But whether the connection 
of glass-painting with Byzantine art arose in the manner just 
indicated or not, or whether it was more or less direct, we may 
conclude that if these artists had had under their eyes that 
standard of excellence which is the foundation of Greek art, at 
however debased a period, instead of being able only dimly to 
perceive it through the corruptions of tradition, they might, in 
point of drawing, have anticipated the artistic triumphs of the 
fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Their works in glass, although 
not altogether free from the stiffness and severe formality of 
Byzantine art, in general exhibit a strong feeling for nature; 
but the nature these artists affected, — doubtless under the in- 
fluence of their traditions, — was not a common and imperfect 
nature, like that represented in the subsequent works of the 
middle ages, but a noble, refined, and elevated nature, such as 
is displayed in the antique Roman bas-reliefs, 1 and again, in 
those great works of the Renaissance, which the discovery and 
direct study of these antiques so strongly promoted. 

Considerations such as these are the best answer to the in- 

1 See the plates, ' Adniiranda Roma- latter quality which probably rendered 

narum Antiquitatum,' by Jacobus de it more useful to the masters of the 

Rubeis. The Roman sculpture, with sixteenth century than the purest Greek 

much of the beauty of the Greek, is less sculpture would have been, 
ideal and more natural. It was this 


sensate outcry which has been raised against the employment, in 
the service of our reformed religion, of anything in the least 
partaking of the character of " Pagan," i. e. classic art, an out- 
cry the less respectable when we know that those who make it 
the loudest are at the same time the most eager to palliate the 
many real paganisms which have been adopted by the Romish 
Ci lurch, some of which are by no means so innocent in their 
consequences as the denounced paganism of artistic truth and 
beauty. If we recognise the beneficial effect of possessing a 
standard of excellence in the perfection and freshness of the 
works of the Renaissance, which seem like the creations of yester- 
day, since, being wholly devoid of quaintness, they address us 
in the language of our own sympathies, — of our own modes of 
thought ; common sense will suggest the wisdom of referring to 
such a standard in modern works, instead of, and in our own 
case without the excuse of necessity, continuing to flounder on, 
as in the middle ages, unassisted by such a guide. It is possible 
that this course might lead to the abandonment of the idea that 
nothing but that lowest of arts, the meagre Gothic of the nine- 
teenth century, 1 is fit for the purposes of our Church ; but we 
may console ourselves with the assurance that the extinction of 
the notion would be followed by the erection of buildings better 
suited to our ritual, to the character of our nation, and practical 
spirit of the age in which we live, as well as by the advancement 
of sound principles in art. 

1 Far be it from me to disparage any and enhances, but whose defects it 
attempt to imjirove our national archi- avoids ; and which seems to require no- 
tecture ; but although we may criticise thing but fine handling to become a 
the Palladiau style, it by no means truly noble style, in all respects worthy 
follows that we ought to set up the of, and suited to, the nineteenth century. 
Gothic as infallible. Any scheme, in- Although yet iu its infancy, and although 
deed, for removing us from the art of but little pains seem hitherto to have 
the classic epochs is preposterous. No been taken with it, its productions, by 
architectutal style can ever be a real their symmetry, simplicity, and gran- 
living style which does not reflect the deur, already often put to shame our 
spirit of its age, and no style can reflect most studied modern ecclesiastical edi- 
the spii'it of this age, which is at once fices. They are, moreover, in entire 
the most powerful and refined age the harmony with other works admitted to 
world has yet seen, except it be capable be embodiments of the spirit of the age, 
of great breadth, sinrplicity, and refine- such as our ships, our machinery, our 
ment; in all which qualities the Gothic bridges, &c. And the spirit in which 
style is notoriously deficient. It is im- they are conceived seems nearly allied 
possible not to see that the civil en i- to those broad and comprehensive views 
neers are the real architects of the day, which characterise our times, and which, 
and that they are silently developing a by contrast, render the narrow-minded 
new and original style, founded on the subtleties of the mediaeval ei-a the more 
old Roman, whose excellences it retains contemptible. 


Charles Winston, del. Philip Delamoue Litho Vincent .Brooks 



(Delivered before the Working Man's Association at Lichfield, 1859.) 

N the present occasion I shall not attempt more 
than to give a short and popular account of a 
curious and beautiful art — that of painting upon 
glass — not indeed from any unwillingness to go 
more fully into the subject, but from a conviction 
that it would be a wearisome and unprofitable 
task to bring forward a multitude of minute 
details, very proper for the due understanding of 
the matter, but which could not be fully apprehended in the 
short time at our disposal this evening, even if I were able to 
illustrate them by drawings, which I do not possess, and even if 
the neighbourhood afforded specimens of glass-painting of various 
dates with which you could be familiar, and to which I could 
refer in explanation. With the exception of the beautiful glass 
in the Cathedral choir, which is all of one period, there is no 
ancient glass in our immediate neighbourhood to which I can 
refer; so that I must content myself with an imperfect state- 
ment, and consider myself fortunate if I can contrive to add 
some trifle to the general stock of information, or suggest some 
idea which may not have already occurred. 

By a glass-painting I mean a painting composed of glass or 
vitreous pastes, because no other materials will long withstand 
the action of the atmosphere ; therefore I shall say nothing 
about pictures on glass, where the painting, or a good part of it, 
consists of ordinary colours mixed with varnish or other tenacious 
material, and which colours must peel off the glass as soon as the 
varnish or gum loses its tenacity, which it usually does in a few 

A true glass-painting can only be effected by means of fire. 
Its colours must either be composed of coloured glass — that is, 
of pieces of glass coloured in their manufacture by the glass- 
maker, and not by the glass-painter — or must be imparted by 


the glass-painter, by means of stains and enamel colours ; and 
the shadows and pencilling of the picture must be painted by the 
glass-painter with enamel colour. And in order to cause the 
stain to be absorbed by the glass, and. the enamel colour to be 
firmly attached to it, it is necessary to expose the glass to a red 
heat in a small furnace or muffle : this is done by the glass- 
painter, and is called burning the glass. 

We often hear it remarked that such a glass-painter's colours 
are better or lighter than another's, that glass colours fade, that 
colours are burnt in, and the like expressions, implying that the 
glass-painter has something to do with the colouring of the glass. 
This, however, at the present time, in this country, is true only 
to a limited extent. The glass-painter can indeed, as I have 
stated, colour a piece of white glass yellow, by means of a stain, 
and impart many other tints to it by the use of enamel colours. 
But the employment of enamel colours to colour glass is now in 
England pretty much gone out of fashion, though still practised 
to a considerable extent on the continent. The ordinary method 
of glass-painting in England, at the present time, is to use for 
the coloured parts of the design glass coloured in its manufacture 
(staining such parts yellow as may be requisite), and to employ 
only one enamel colour — an enamel brown — for painting the 
shadows and pencilling the picture upon the glass, and not other- 
wise for the purpose of colouring it ; so that, under this system, 
the glass-painter has little or nothing to do with the colouring 
of the glass. He buys the coloured glass as well as the white 
glass in the market, which is open to all alike, and his business 
consists in arranging and shaping the various pieces so as to 
correspond with the different colours of his design, in the manner 
of a coarse mosaic ; in painting these pieces of glass with the 
enamel brown, so as to represent the shadows and pencilling of 
the design ; in applying the yellow stain where necessary ; in 
burning the glass to fix the enamel brown and cause the stain to 
operate ; and, finally, in connecting the various pieces of glass 
together with leadwork ready to be put up in the window. 

The enamel brown, like any other enamel colour, consists of 
colouring matter, mixed with pulverised glass, called flux or 
enamel ; this flux being of a nature more easily fusible than the 
glass intended to be coloured melts, whilst the other is only at a 
red heat, and on the cooling of the furnace hardens and attaches 
itself, along with the colouring matter enveloped in it, firmly to 
the glass. 

If the glass is not heated sufficiently to melt the enamel, or if 


the enamel or flux, when cool, should by natural vicissitudes of 
temperature expand and contract in a different ratio from that 
at which the glass which is painted with the enamel colour 
expands and contracts, the enamel colour will, in process of 
time, peel or chip off. This incident has given rise to the notion 
that the colours of a glass-painting are apt to fade : it would be 
more correct to say that enamel colours are apt to become 
obliterated in patches. The colours, however, which are ordi- 
narily employed, that is to say, the colours of coloured glass, 
never do fade, that I am aware of; the enamel brown may 
become obliterated, but the colours themselves remain unchanged 
and last so long as the glass which contains them exists. 

The mode of making glass, whether white or coloured, is very 
simple and ingenious. To begin with the white : the materials, 
consisting principally of sand and alkali, are fused together in 
the glass-house by means of intense and long-continued heat, 
and the melted matter is formed into sheets of glass in the fol- 
lowing manner : a workman dips one end of a long hollow iron 
tube into the pot, and collects upon it a mass of melted glass 
weighing perhaps nine or ten pounds ; he then blows with his 
mouth clown the tube and expands the mass into a hollow globule, 
larger and larger, until the sides of the globe are as thin as he 
intends the sheet of glass to be : when this is done, another work- 
man approaches with a solid iron rod, called a punt, having a bit 
of melted glass at one end ; this he applies to the side of the 
globe opposite the blow-pipe, which immediately adheres to the 
melted glass at the end of the punt. The blow-pipe is then 
disengaged from the globe, leaving a small round hole in it ; 
tins hole is, by means of the punt, which is now firmly attached 
to the globe, turned to the furnace, the glass is softened by the 
heat, and the hole is made wider and wider by repeatedly 
trundling the punt, until at last the whole globe of glass, yielding 
to the centrifugal impulse, flies open, leaving a circular plain 
disk, between four and five feet in diameter, attached to the 
punt by its centre. It is speedily disengaged and placed in the 
annealing oven, where the glass is allowed to cool very gradually, 
in order to render it less brittle, and when taken out the sheet 
of glass is ready for sale, being one of those circular tables which 
may be seen in any glazier's shop, and which has in its centre a 
lump or bulVs-eye, being the remains of the piece of glass by 
which the sheet was attached to the punt. 

This is one way of making a sheet of glass. There is another, 
which seems to have been the earliest method, and which is now 


generally preferred, because it avoids the blemish of the bull's- 
eye and thickening of the sheet in its centre — defects inseparable 
from the former process. The globule of glass is blown as before, 
and a hole made in it opposite to the blow-pipe, without disen- 
gaging the globule from the blow-pipe. This hole is gradually 
enlarged, to the diameter, perhaps, of a foot or more. A punt, 
having a cross-iron or a circular piece of glass at the end large 
enough to embrace this hole, is applied to it ; the blow-pipe is 
then disengaged, and the hole left by its removal is enlarged like 
the other, so that the piece of glass assumes the form of a 
cylinder : it is then disengaged from the punt and annealed. 
After this the cylinder is cut through one side, heated in a 
furnace till it is quite soft, and then spread open flat; when cool, 
the sheet of glass is ready for use : it is usually oblong. The 
improved method is to split the cylinder before it is put into 
the annealing furnace, and to use the annealing furnace as a 
spreading furnace, by which means the double heating of the 
glass is avoided. Nearly all the glass used for painting upon is 
made according to one or other of these methods. 

The coloured glass is made exactly like the white glass (the 
colouring matter being simply added to the white glass whilst it 
is in the pot), with but one exception. There is one kind of 
coloured glass which is not coloured throughout the entire sub- 
stance of the sheet, but on one side only, the rest of the sheet 
being white : this glass is called coated glass. For making it two 
pots of melted matter are required — the one containing coloured 
glass, the other white glass. The workman dips his blowing-iron 
first into the coloured pot and collects on it a lump of coloured 
glass ; he next dips this lump into the white pot and envelops 
it with a mass of white glass ; he then blows the whole into a 
globule, which he forms into a sheet precisely as has already 
been described : of course the sheet, when made, has one side 
coloured, the other side white. 

Having thus described the nature of a glass-painting and the 
method of its construction, I propose to give a slight historical 
sketch of the rise and progress of the art. 

The art of making glass, whether white or coloured, is of 
enormous antiquity, and it is one of those discoveries which was 
brought to perfection at a very early period. The early Nine- 
vite, Egyptian, and Greek white glass, of which there is an 
abundant collection of specimens in the British Museum, is not 
so pellucid as that now manufactured, principally owing to our 
use of absolutely pure soda ; but it is as good and perfect as the 


glass ordinarily employed until about one hundred years ago, 
and the coloured glass is, I think, finer in tint than any that has 
hitherto been manufactured. I think it is even finer than the 
old mediaeval glass of the twelfth century, which, of all later 
specimens, is that which most closely resembles it. 

The ingenuity of the ancients in making ornaments in coloured 
glass has not been surpassed by the Venetian glass-makers of the 
sixteenth century, and their work continues hitherto unrivalled. 

Mr. Apsley Pellatt has collected, in a little work called ' The 
Curiosities of Glass-making,' an amount of information respecting 
the skill of the ancients in making glass, that may be sought in 
vain in any other book : and to this little publication I would 
refer those who are anxious to pursue the subject further. 

Yet with all this skill in blowing glass and modelling it ; in 
excavating vases, like that of Sir Anthony Rothschild which was 
exhibited at the Society of Arts a few years ago, out of solid 
blocks of the material ; they do not appear to have hit upon the 
art of making sheets of glass, fit for the glazing of windows, until 
a comparatively late period. I believe the oldest example of 
window-glass known is the specimen preserved in the Museum 
at Naples, consisting of panes let into a bronze lattice, which 
was found in an apartment of the public baths, disinterred 
during the excavations amongst the ruins of Pompeii — a city 
overwhelmed by an eruption of Mount Vesuvius in the fortieth 
year of our era. 

I myself possess a small fragment of flat white glass, which 
was found in the ruins of a Koman villa in Kent, that is sup- 
posed to have been window-glass ; and from the straightness of 
its selvedge it appears to be part of a sheet made in cylinder, as 
already described. 

We may safely assume that the invention of window-glass, 
having once been made, always continued to be practised. 
There can be no doubt that the windows of the Church of St. 
Sophia at Constantinople (now a mosque) were not only glazed 
with glass, but were even decorated with coloured glass. This 
is distinctly stated by an ancient writer : and the recent 
examination of this mosque by the architect employed by the 
Prussian government has brought to light the way in which 
the glazing was performed. It appears that a stone or marble 
frame-work was inserted into the window, dividing the opening 
into little squares, and that each of these squares was rabbetted 
for the retention of the glass. I do not think that any of the 


glass was found in its original position, but it is easy to conceive 
how it was held in its place. There is nothing, I believe, tc 
show that this glass was ever painted upon. The glazing niaj 
be inferred, from the ancient description, to have been simply s 
pattern of white and coloured pieces of glass, quite plain, and 
the pattern must have been a very stiff one. 

At what time the art of painting upon glass was discovered 
must probably for ever remain unknown. It would be natural 
to seek for the earliest specimens in Constantinople, which pro- 
videntially remained the cradle of the arts during the awful and 
Avide-spread desolation occasioned by the overthrow of the 
mighty Eoman Empire in the West in the fourth, fifth, sixth, 
and seventh centuries. But Constantinople has, in its turn, 
suffered so dreadfully from the scourge of war, that little 
remains of its early magnificence, most of its great monuments 
have perished, and the works of art with which they were 
adorned have perished with them. Nothing, I believe, now 
remains in Constantinople in the way of ancient glazing, except 
the coloured windows of some of the mosques, comparatively of 
late date. But the mode in which they are constructed, though 
probably of Byzantine origin, is but a modification of the method 
adopted at St. Sophia. Mr. Burgess, the architect of the 
Memorial Church at Constantinople, showed me the other day 
a drawing he had made of one of the windows of the Mosque of 
Sultan Suleyman at Constantinople, which was erected early in 
the sixteenth century. Froni this drawing and his description 
the glazing appears to be of precisely the same nature as that of 
a window brought some years ago from Cairo by Mr. Bell, the 
late Member for Guildford, with which window I have been long 
familiar. The whole opening of the window is occupied with a 
pierced framework of plaster, the openings of which form a com- 
plete and varied pattern. The frame is moulded on the same 
principle as a common sash-bar, the ribs being worked off to an 
edge towards the spectator, so as to be deep and strong, and yet 
present, comparatively, but little impediment to the light. The 
back of the frame is level and flat, and upon it are attached 
with cement the little pieces of glass with which the openings 
are covered ; the pieces of glass being either white or coloured, 
according to the nature of the design. None of these pieces of 
glass are painted, yet the plastic nature of the material, and 
consequent facility of working it, have allowed so many little 
notches and other irregularities to be produced in the frame as 


really to supersede the necessity of paint ; flowers, vases, and the 
like simple objects, being represented very intelligibly by the 
sash-bars alone, and the coloured glass inserted in them. 

One great peculiarity of the glass employed in these patterns 
is its extreme thinness, which is less than one sixteenth of an 
inch. In its colour it greatly resembles the earlier specimens ; 
a resemblance tending to show a common origin. 

The first authentic account of painted glass that we possess 
is given in the treatise of Theophilus. It has been doubted 
whether this was written in the tenth or twelfth century. I 
incline to the opinion that assigns the later date. In it the 
writer minutely describes the method of making the glass, as 
well as the mode of painting it, and states that France is the 
country for painted windows. Of the truthfulness of Theophilus 
I can bear ample testimony, having for the last few years assisted 
some chemical friends in their analytical investigation of the 
manufacture of ancient glass. In every instance we have found 
Theophilus's statements, as to the materials and colouring matter 
used in glass-making, perfectly correct. Of course we have been 
able to explain and account for everything which puzzled him. 
But his recorded observations have proved most trustworthy. 
There is, therefore, good reason for believing that France was, at 
a period at least as early as the twelfth century, the cradle of 
glass-painting ; and the probability is that Limoges or its neigh- 
bourhood was the principal spot at which it was at first practised. 
The Abbe Texier, in his researches into the early history of 
enamelling, for which art Limoges was always most famous, has 
proved that so early as 979 a Venetian colony was settled at 
Limoges, for the purpose of trading with the spices and other 
commodities of the East, conveyed thence by way of Alexandria 
and Marseilles : Alexandria then being the chief port through 
which the commerce and arts of the East (including those of 
Constantinople) found their way into the West : and he shows 
that Greek artists were settled at Limoges in after times. It 
would not be safe, of course, to jump to the conclusion that 
glass-painting was necessarily invented by the enamellers ; but 
I think we may conclude that both arts were of Byzantine 
origin, and were imported into Western Europe in the way indi- 
cated. And this supposition derives some strength from the 
ascertained resemblance between the texture of the twelfth- 
century glass and that of the antique — a resemblance too close 
to have been accidental — and the thoroughly Byzantine cha- 
racter of the earlier glass-paintings in their design and drawing. 


The earliest existing specimens of painted glass are not older 
than the twelfth century ; and, I believe, the earliest well-authen- 
ticated example is not earlier than the middle of the twelfth 
century. It may be doubted if any specimen is more than a 
few years older than the middle of the twelfth century. The 
example to which I allude is in the Cathedral of St. Denys, and 
is supposed, from a portrait it exhibits of Abbot Suger, to be 
some of the glass which it is known that dignitary presented to 
his church in the middle of the twelfth century, It is executed 
according to the method described by Theophilus, which I 
have already mentioned ; the colouring of the picture being 
effected by means of pieces of white and coloured glass, and the 
drawing and pencilling of the design being done with enamel 
brown. This glass of Abbot Suger is a type of a class which 
continued, with little variation, to be used in churches until 
about 1250 — a period of about 100 years — of which there are 
numerous and rich specimens in France in the Cathedrals of 
Angers, Sens, Chartres, Bourges, and in others ; and in England, 
principally in the Cathedrals of Canterbury, Lincoln, and 

Painted windows generally may be divided into two classes — 
Picture-windows, where the greater part of the design consists of 
representations of the human figure — and Pattern-windows, whose 
design principally consists of an ornamental pattern. 

The picture-windows of this early style are extremely interest- 
ing, both on account of their intrinsic excellence, and the 
manner in which they betray the connexion between the art of 
the middle ages and that of classical antiquity. They may be 
divided into three classes : — The Medallion Windoiv, in which 
some connected story is told by a series of pictures set in medal- 
lions, which are arranged throughout the window in a geo- 
metrical order ; the Jesse Window, in which our Saviour's 
Genealogy is represented by a series of figures encircled or 
enclosed within flowing scrolls of foliage ; and the Figure and 
Canopy Window, in which is represented a figure standing under 
a canopy. The two first, modes of design certainly had their 
origin in remote antiquity ; the last, perhaps, can be hardly said 
to be indicated in some of the ornamental paintings at Pompeii. 
AYe see the medallion system in its utmost simplicity and 
quaintness in some of the Assyrian sculptures, and again ? 
refined by art and good sense, in some of the Roman monu- 
ments, particularly on the Trajan and Antonine columns, where 
the events of a campaign are represented in a series of has- 


reliefs, wound in a serpentine manner round the shaft of a 
column ; and again, on the Arches of Titus and Constantine ; on 
the latter are some sculptured pictures in circular medallions. 

There are also in the Museum of the Vatican some very 
beautiful bas-reliefs, representing figures encircled by flowing 
scrolls of foliage, which it requires but little acuteness to per- 
ceive are the type of the design of the Jesse window. And 
both forms of design were handed down from the time of the 
Eoman Empire to the period of which I am particularly speaking 
— the middle of the twelfth century- — by an almost continuous 
series of carved ivories and illuminated manuscripts. 

It is not to be supposed that either the medallion or Jesse 
window at all approaches the art of the ancient Eomans in the 
excellence of the figure-drawing, the natural yet refined cha- 
racter of the draperies, nor even in the distinctness of the com- 
position. Unlike the tessellated pavements of the Eomans, or 
the ornamental frescoes at Pompeii, and the tombs at Eome, 
both the medallion and Jesse windows are too apt to appear 
confused when seen from a little distance. The medallion 
windows, indeed, in general, seldom have their design more 
made out than that of a Turkey carpet, to which they are often 
likened — very truly as regards their effect — which is that of 
a mass of deep and vivid colours intersected by thin white lines, 
by which the principal divisions of the design are indicated. 
Instead of the figures being small in comparison with the 
panels, and the panels being well cut out by broad borders — to 
which is attributable the distinctness of the ornamental designs 
of Eoman antiquity, and of the coloured ceilings of the sixteenth 
century, which were borrowed from them — the figures are large 
here in comparison with the spaces allotted to them, occupying 
nearly all the ground of the panel. The ornament is also large 
in comparison with the figures, and, though the grounds of the 
panels, and of the intermediate spaces of the window, are gene- 
rally of different colours, the extent to which these grounds are 
covered with the figures and ornaments prevents their colours 
showing in sufficient quantities to produce proper distinctness in 
the design ; and the manner in which the colours of the figures and 
ornaments are interchanged and scattered all over these grounds 
tends still more to produce monotony. It would seem as if the 
designers of these windows were more anxious to secure a good 
and imposing general effect of colour, than to give prominence 
to the figure part of the composition, so as to make the pictures 
tell their own story plainly and distinctly. But as affording 


effects of colour, many of these windows are quite unrivalled; 
they are harmonious, and never raw or positive ; rich, and never 
gaudy ; deep and intense, and never flimsy ; brilliant, and never 
heavy or opaque ; and, of course, in all these essential parti- 
culars, contrast very favourably with their modern imitations. 
The secret of their success lies rather in the peculiar nature of 
the glass of which they are composed, than in the mode in which 
the various tints are arranged. Each colour, besides being 
deep, is harmonious in itself — an absolutely pure colour would 
be a curiosity if met with in twelfth or thirteenth century glass 
— consequently the effect can hardly ever be bad, in whatever 
way the colours may happen to be arranged. The depth and 
harmony of the colour qualities, so beautiful in themselves, ren- 
dered a highly finished style of figure-painting improper as well 
as unnecessary. If the figures had been highly and delicately 
shaded, the depth of local colour would have prevented their 
finish from being seen or appreciated ; and the harmony pro- 
duced by shading with enamel brown upon glass of different 
tints would have been superfluous where the tints themselves 
were originally so harmonious. Therefore these ancient glass- 
painters contented themselves with re])resenting the deepest 
shadows with absolutely black lines, and uniting these with a 
very slight wash of shadow in half-tint, to prevent their appear- 
ing too harsh ; and, in general, they avoided subjects which 
could not be intelligibly represented by a few figures arranged 
in one plane, like the figures in a bas-relief, and placed on 
a stiff background of blue or red, trusting to the glass itself to 
do the rest. It is hardly possible to conceive a style of execu- 
tion better adapted than this was to the peculiar material of the 
twelfth and thirteenth centuries ; and, however we may criticise 
the designs of this period, it must be confessed that the earliest 
style of glass-painting, viz. that which was practised until the 
middle of the thirteenth century, contains the germ of a true 
and noble style, a path of high development and striking effects; 
provided that the same material as that of the twelfth century 
shall be again supplied, and provided that — and this is equally 
essential — the task of developing the style is undertaken by 
artists of the first ability, having the power, as well as the will, 
to work up to that standard of perfection in figure-drawing 
which classical antiquity affords, and which, even at the worst 
times, seems constantly to have influenced the Byzantine artists 
and their immediate followers, instead of its being left to the 
efforts of mere draughtsmen, capable only of working down 


to models which must now be considered imperfect or absurd, and 
are only interesting from our being able to recognise in them the 
art of a better period, in spite of the deformity with which it has 
been overlaid by the unskilf ulness and corrupt taste of a rude age. 

The design of the Jesse window is, owing to its nature, in 
general more distinct and effective than that of the Medallion 
window, though still very inferior in this respect to its classical 
prototype ; and that of the Figure and Canopy window is yet 
more intelligible, as far as regards the figure, but the canopy 
is usually so insignificant, and so out of drawing, as often to be 
made out with difficulty. 

The Pattern windows are always less rich in colour than the 
Picture windows. In general they are principally composed of 
white glass, on which are painted borders and scrolls of foliage. 
They often bear a coloured border all round them, and coloured 
glass is sparingly introduced into the pattern-work, to render its 
design more marked, and to enrich its effect. 

These different kinds of windows often are employed together 
in different parts of the same building. In most cathedrals the 
Medallion windows are placed in the aisle windows of the nave 
and choir ; the Figure and Canopy windows occupy the clear- 
story ; and the west window of the nave frequently exhibits a 
Jesse. Pattern windows are mostly employed in the pierced tri- 
forium, where such exists, as well as in some of the windows of 
the apsidal chapels, where perhaps light was an object. Thus 
the windows having the most elaborate design are generally 
placed nearest the eye, — a happy and sensible arrangement. The 
large size of the figures in the clearstory may appear inju- 
dicious, on account of the tendency of the figures to overpower 
the architecture, and lessen the apparent height of the building ; 
but this objection, though sound in principle, will hardly hold in 
practice, owing to the defective amount of shading in the figures, 
which, thus become less distinct than might be expected from 
their size, and present, in short, little else than an effect of 

The ornamental details of these early glass-paintings are very 
Greek in character. The foliaged ornaments are highly conven- 
tional in their form, closely resembling the architectural foliage 
employed by the Greeks, though less varied in their shape. 
Trefoiled and cinquefoiled terminations are the most common. 
It is seldom that a naturally shaped leaf occurs, and, when it 
does, its serrations are not represented by notches, but by care- 
fully drawn curves. A decided preference for idealised form 



characterises the works of this period. The same Greek feeling 
may likewise be observed in the figures and the draperies. In 
some of the earlier examples we recognise the peculiarities of 
the true Byzantine school in the classical contour of the heads, 
their staring eyeballs, and inanimate expression. But a more 
vigorous style soon developed itself; and, even so early as the 
latter part of the twelfth century we meet with figures in glass 
very closely resembling the old Bonian, having heads quite of 
classical contour, yet full of character, and of varied expression, 
and only just sufficiently idealised to produce elevation of senti- 
ment. The stiff, over-idealised, and inanimate Byzantine type 
was, however, retained until quite the middle of the thirteenth 
century in the representation of Divine persons, probably from 
an unwillingness to depart from established precedents in matters 
of such sacred import. The draperies of the earlier figures are 
also truly Byzantine in their closeness and tightness ; but those 
of the later figures are easy and natural, yet, in the character of 
their folds, very like the old Roman. It is possible that they 
were copied from nature, and that their classical air is partly 
owing to the fact that many of the dresses used in the twelfth 
century, and, perhaps, early part of the thirteenth, were actually 
shaped like the Boman. Thus the tunic, or under-coat, of the 
thirteenth century is exactly like the Roman in form. Again, 
the military or state-cloak is the paludamentum of the Roman 
generals without any variation. 

The Ecclesiastical dalmatic is the same as the state dress of 
the Roman Broconsul ; and, as if for the purpose of confounding 
those enthusiastic moderns who are so shocked at any allusion to 
paganism, and who look upon the twelfth and thirteenth cen- 
turies as the " Ages of Faith," we occasionally see in the works 
of this period the figure of a holy saint (no doubt copied from 
some earlier example) innocently habited in the toga, the ordi- 
nary dress of the ancient Romans. There is reason for supposing 
that the dresses worn in the twelfth century were made of mate- 
rials very similar to those used by the Romans, which may 
account for the great similarity in the set and folds of the 
draperies of the two periods. 

What I have stated respecting the early emancipation of art 
from the thraldom of Byzantine tradition, as exemplified in the 
glass-paintings of Northern Europe, may appear opposed to 
the general impression that modern art dates from the school 
of Cimabue, in the thirteenth century, but, in truth, the whole 
subject is involved in the greatest obscurity. Writers are prone 


to generalise from a too limited collection of facts, and we must 
recollect that hitherto more pains have been taken to investigate 
the progress of the arts in Italy than in North Europe. I can 
only state the fact as I find it, without attempting to account 
for it. But the naturalistic tendency of the school of Cimabue 
in Italy, in the middle and last half of the thirteenth century, 
soon began to be felt in North Europe. We see it most strikingly 
exemplified in the ornamental decoration of glass-paintings 
from about the year 12G0 downwards. The conventional Greek 
foliage of the earlier part of the thirteenth century was about 
this time gradually exchanged for foliaged ornaments composed 
of the naturally formed leaves of the oak, maple, ivy, and haw- 
thorn ; and the figure draperies became, in conformity with the 
new style, broader and simpler in their folds. I am afraid that 
the change was not attended with any benefit to the higher 
interests of art, for I much question whether anything more 
uninteresting and insipid was ever seen than the stereotyped 
flat features and screwed-up eyes which we meet with in nearly 
all glass-paintings between 1250 and 1350, the next hundred 
years of our history to which I am now directing your attention. 
I cannot but think that glass-painting gradually deteriorated 
from the middle of the thirteenth century, until it revived again, 
in a very different phase, in the early part of the sixteenth cen- 
tury ; and that the greatest deterioration took place early in the 
fourteenth century, contemporary with the architectural style 
which is commonly called the early Decorated. It seems to me 
that the whole of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries was 
spent in the attempt to get out of the early artistically flat style 
of representation, proper for stiff colouring, into a more pictorial 
style, requiring colour in broader masses and diminished depth ; 
and that the greater part of the works of this period, and espe- 
cially that of the earlier portion of it, must be regarded as 
transitional, and displaying those contradictory features which 
invariably present themselves on the abandonment of an esta- 
blished principle without any distinct view of that which is to 
succeed it. I am not asserting that the glass-painting of this 
period has not its good points ; all styles have their beauties ; 
but if consistency of principle be a mark of a good style, then 
the glass- painting of this period is far inferior to that of the 
immediately preceding and succeeding periods. 

A great change in the design of glass-paintings was rendered 
necessary by the general adoption of the mullioned window, and 
consequent use of openings extremely narrow in proportion to 

R 2 


their height. The medallion window, which requires a width of 
some four or five feet for its due development, was speedily 
abandoned, and the expedient was adopted of combining the 
picture with the pattern-window by introducing across the lower 
lights of a white pattern-window two or more rows of panels 
containing pictures, as well as filling the tracery lights with 
coloured figures and ornaments. Sometimes these panels, like 
medallions, simply contained groups of figures on stiff-coloured 
grounds, as in the chapter-house windows at York ; more com- 
monly the group was put under a canopy or shrine, as in the 
nave of York, which had the effect of reducing the size of the 
figures and making the picture indistinct ; whilst the canopy, 
though complicated in construction, was drawn and coloured in 
such a way as to appear as if it had been ironed out fiat — the 
depth of the niche and projections of the tabernacle work 
being alike unrepresented. 

The Pattern-window continued in use, each light of the 
window being surrounded with a coloured border, and the 
remainder filial with white glass, on which was drawn in black 
a geometrical pattern with flowing scrolls of foliage. The Figure 
and Canopy window was also common, each lower light having a 
figure and canopy in it, the canopy having the same defects that 
have just been noticed ; and the Jesse window was much em- 
ployed: of this, the scrolls generally extended from one light 
into another ; so that the whole of the lower lights were filled 
with one connected design. In like manner, on the Continent, 
canopies and groups were spread from one light to another. 
But this practice was not followed in England : the usual 
method here was, to divide the group into several portions ; to 
put each under a canopy, and confine it within the limits of 
a single light : thus, what was in fact but a single picture looked 
as if it were three or more distinct pictures, each portion being 
complete in itself, and separated from the others, not so much 
by the mullions of the window as by its pictorial accessories. 

The colouring of this period was almost as deep and powerful 
as that of the last period ; but the discovery of staining white 
glass yellow, which seems to have been made about 1310, 
tended very much to cause yellow to be used to the exclusion of 
some other colours. Indeed glass-paintings, as early as about 
1350, are remarkable for the quantity of white and yellow 
stained glass in their composition, as is the case with the east 
window of Gloucester Cathedral choir. At first the arrangement 
of the figures in the groups was simple, like that of the former 

i.H'.muN, enos 



age ; but by degrees the figures were made to overlap one 
another more; and the same flat style of execution being per- 
severed in, the consequence was, that the groups became far 
more confused and indistinct than the earlier ones, which were 
more cut out and insulated by means of the ground of the panel. 
In general, the individual colours were disposed in broader 
masses than heretofore, — a peculiarity which was still more 
remarkable in the next style, to which I shall now allude, and 
the remarks upon which will carry us down to the end of the 
fifteenth century. 

About 1360 or 1370 a remarkable change took place in the 
manufacture of the glass, and this was simultaneous with a great 
change in the mode of painting it. As late as 1350 there was 
but little deviation from the earliest mode of painting ; black 
lines represented the deep shadows, and a very slight wash of 
enamel work indicated the shadow in half tint. But after this 
the lines diminished in thickness and intensity, and were 
retained only as outlines ; the deep, as well as the light shadows 
being represented by a stippled coat of enamel brown. Indeed, 
the only real difference between the execution of the imperfect 
glass-paintings of the end of the fourteenth century and the 
perfect ones of the sixteenth was, that in the latter the shadows 
were deeper and more skilfully applied. In the works of both 
periods shadows were represented by stipple shading, black 
lines being only used for outlines. This mode of execution was, 
of course, more pictorial than that which had preceded it ; and 
the change in the manufacture of the glass to which I have 
alluded, which principally consisted in making the colours 
brighter and less positive, enabled the more delicate and finished 
execution to be fully seen, and offered greater facilities for a 
more pictorial and less mosaic style of colouring. 

The Figure and Canopy window was the favourite design of 
the period of which I am now speaking ; the form of the window 
openings during the Perpendicular style of architecture 
particularly favouring it. A single figure and canopy commonly 
filled each lower light, with or without a small subject beneath, 
such as a coat of arms, or a group of figures, usually representing 
the donor of the window and his family : and each of the upright 
tracery lights Avas occupied with a smaller edition of the figure 
and canopy. Windows of this description, partly owing to their 
being executed with light and delicately finished shading, and 
to the proportion of white glass in their composition, always 
have a particularly pleasing silvery appearance. They want the 


force of the earlier windows, but they are more delicate and 
refined. Their design is also distinct, owing to the way in which 
the figure is cut out by the coloured back of the niche, and 
to the canopy itself being almost entirely white and yellow- 
stained. Their great defect is their flatness. Though con- 
siderable pains were taken by shading, and even by an attempt 
at perspective drawing, to give projection to the canopy hood, 
and rotundity to the figure, these old artists totally failed in 
their object, partly through their timidity in applying shadow in 
sufficient depth, partly through their ignorance of the true 
effects of light and shade, and partly, I may add, through their 
ignorance of the principles of correct drawing. Instead of the 
picture aimed at, nothing was produced but a pleasing silvery 
effect of colour. This defect is still more palpable in another 
very common design of this period, consisting of three or more 
shrines, with groups of figures placed under them, piled up one 
above the other in each of the lower lights of a window. 

We learn from these examples that there are but two ways of 
producing a picture on glass — either with skilful shading, where 
there is no particular attention paid to the position of the objects 
to be represented ; or with comparatively little shading, in which 
case it is essential that the figures should be well cut out and 
separated from each other by a coloured ground. For, as I said, 
the general distinctness of the Figure and Canopy design is 
entirely owing to the latter principle being adhered to, though 
accidentally. The confusion inseparable from the use of small 
groups under shrines executed with so little shading, and without 
attention to the placing of the figures — of which the great east 
window of York affords a striking example — is owing to the 
figures being designed so as to overlap one another, and to their 
not being relieved from each other by a proper application of 
light and shade. Windows so constructed look, at a little 
distance, like a mere collection of pieces of glass of different 
colours ; and even when closely examined, it is sometimes not 
easy, at first, to detach the figures from their shrines, and make 
out the composition. 

The Jesse window continued to be employed, but there is 
nothing which calls for remark upon it. The Pattern- window 
had dwindled down to the simplest of all compositions, being 
composed of quarries of white glass, with some little ornament 
painted on each, and having a border round the light with a little 
colour in it. 

We are all aware that the middle of the fifteenth century is 


famous in the history of art, as the era from which we date 
the commencement of our modern system. It was at this 
time that a new light broke in upon the minds of the Italian 
artists as to the true method of representation, and the great 
truths demonstrated by the paintings of Masaccio and others 
continued to be elaborated during the whole last half of the 
fifteenth century and early part of the sixteenth, until painting 
reached its perfection under such geniuses as Raphael, Titian, 
Tintoretto, and the other masters of the sixteenth century. 

The great improvement which took place in the middle of 
the fifteenth century was perhaps not so much in drawing as in 
the art of producing the effect of nature in light and shade. 
Before the time of Masaccio oil-paintings, though very often 
beautifully drawn, were flat in effect, and consequently confused, 
like those glass-paintings to which I last alluded. He seems to 
have been the first who noticed how little Nature was observed, 
and how little the power of art was developed, in paintings 
where perspective and light and shade were disregarded. And 
the hint was not given in vain. 

About the same time a standard of perfection hidden from the 
mediaeval artists was brought to light by the discovery of the 
antique sculptures at Rome, and artists once more beheld the 
human figure in its utmost beauty in forms now rendered familiar 
by means of casts, — forms in which we see our nature in spotless 
purity, innocent and sublime, and such as we may imagine those 
of our first parents to have been. 

The discovery was well timed. All prejudice against these 
ancient works, on account of their pagan origin, had long- 
ceased with the extinction of paganism : they fell into the 
hands of men capable of appreciating them, and the monu- 
ments of a false religion became the means of enlisting on the 
side of truth all those sympathies which it is the province of the 
highest and most refined art to excite. Really I am not surprised 
that the period of the "Revival of Art," or the "Renaissance," 
as it is variously termed, should always be regarded with such 
enthusiasm, by all, indeed, but a very small knot of modern 
writers, who, I am persuaded, will never obtain popular sympathy. 
For "Modern Art," as it is called by the writers of the sixteenth 
century, by way of distinction from the dry and imperfect 
mediaeval art, is inseparably connected with some of our most 
pleasing reminiscences — with the conviction that about the end 
of the fifteenth century the human race in Europe got a fresh 


start. Men's minds then became expanded; and a spirit of 
inquiry arose, before which the trammels of superstition, and the 
false reasoning of the mediaeval era, were dissipated like mist 
before the sun. Broad views began to be taken in other matters 
besides art ; the foundation was then laid of modern liberty, and 
of modern philosophy, to the united effects of which as well the 
present material prosperity, as the higher intellectual and moral 
culture of this country can be clearly traced. People who attempt 
to revive mediaeval usages and mediaeval art seem to overlook 
the great fact that the invention of printing, the Reformation, 
and Lord Bacon's works, have separated the nineteenth century 
from the middle ages by an impassable gulf. 

As might be expected, the improvement in art, to which I 
have alluded, was not confined tcfltaly, but extended its influence 
to Flanders, France, Germany, and this country, and glass- 
painting in all these countries, for a short period, felt the benefit 
of it. We see a vast improvement in the glass-paintings executed 
in the early part of the sixteenth century, both in drawing and 
in light and shade; and the improvement was progressive 'until 
about the middle of the century, when the very causes which 
had tended to its elevation, being pushed too far, occasioned its 
decline. Considered as a pictorial art, glass-painting seems to 
have reached perfection between 1530 and 1550: it is perhaps 
not too much to say that its decline commenced as early as 1545. 
But to justify this assertion I must, with your indulgence, enter 
a little into matter of detail. 

Every species of representative art, whether oil-painting, water- 
colour-painting, fresco, tapestry, mosaic-work, or glass-painting, 
must, of course, be carried into effect by the use of certain mate- 
rials, and the criterion of the proper mode of using such materials 
is, that it displays their good qualities, and conceals their 
defects, as much as is compatible with their employment. Thus 
in glass-painting the good quality of the material, glass, is its 
transparency — a quality which makes colours more vivacious 
and brilliant than the colours of any opaque material. The 
defectiveness of glass is its brittleness, and the impossibility, 
in our present state of chemical knowledge, either of painting a 
piece of glass with a variety of colours individually as bright as 
the colours of glass tinted with them in its manufacture, or of 
fastening a number of pieces of coloured glass together except 
by means of a metallic and consequently opaque framework; 
and also its limited scale of colour, if coloured glass alone is 


used, and the impossibility of representing on it an amount of 
deep transparent shade equal to that which we see in oil-paint- 
ings, particularly in those of the Venetian school. 

The necessity of leading a glass-painting together is one of 
those conditions which cannot be evaded by any ingenuity. The 
lead-work and saddle-bars must be accepted as necessary parts 
of the composition. The design must be made with reference to 
them, and that glass-painting must be acknowledged to be the 
best which admits of the leads being thrown into the outlines, 
and made to serve as outlines ; and which by the simplicity, 
I might almost say roughness, of its design and execution, pre- 
vents the harshness of the saddle-bars from being obtrusive. In 
this respect the glass-paintings prior to 1550, and until the 
eighteenth century, must be considered superior to those later 
works in which the attempt has been made to ignore the leads 
and saddle-bars, by leading the work together in squares indepen- 
dently of the outlines of the composition, or by twisting the 
saddle-bars so as to avoid their cutting the design at regular 
intervals ; because both methods immediately suggest the idea 
of a blemished picture, and make us immediately perceive how 
much better the work would be without leads or saddle-bars. 
But a window cannot be constructed without them : hence 
it is better to adopt them as essential parts of the design ; 
and the beautiful windows of the choir of this cathedral, which 
bear date between 1532 and 1539, show that a design so 
constituted is compatible with high pictorial effect. Again, 
another condition, which must be particularly observed, is the 
preservation of the transparency of the material to the greatest 
extent consistent with the production of a picture. Whatever 
the amount of shading, there must be a great deal of clear high 
light, — that is to say, the glass, in the high lights of the picture, 
must be left clear and untouched with any enamel colour. To 
subdue or lay down those high lights is at once to deprive a 
glass-painting of its chief beauty, its brilliancy and transparency, 
and to reduce it to the appearance of a bad oil-painting, because, 
however it may be made to vie with an oil-painting in drawing 
and composition, it must always be inferior to an oil-painting in 
the nice gradations of tone and tint, and in that clear-obscure 
liquid shade which can be given with such astonishing fidelity in 
an oil-painting ; besides that it is more like a sketch than a finished 
work, on account of the decided manner in which the outlines of 
objects are defined by the leads. In this respect again I would 
submit that the glass-paintings of the middle of the sixteenth 


century are superior to subsequent works. In the most highly- 
finished of them, like the glass in this cathedral, there is always 
abundance of high lights left clear in the glass. These high lights 
are indeed, to a certain extent, now obscured in the glass of the 
cathedral by the decomposition of the material from long ex- 
posure to the weather : but I am speaking of these works as they 
issued from the painter's studio. There are plenty of other 
glass-paintings in existence, of the same date as these, which, 
owing to more favourable circumstances, have preserved the 
surface of their material, and which consequently enable us to 
form an opinion of the original effect of other works similarly 

To what extent shading ought to be carried in glass is a 
question which receives its best solution in the rule which 
imposes on every representative art the necessity of its suggesting 
no defects. And here again we recognise the greater skill of 
the artists of the middle of the sixteenth century as compared 
with that of their successors. I have mentioned the impossibility 
of representing in a glass-painting that amount of clear deep 
transparent shade that one sees in an oil-painting. For want of 
this power many subjects are wholly unfit for a glass-painting ; 
and the artists of the middle of the sixteenth century, with that 
common sense which usually denotes uncommon knowledge, 
invariably declined to represent such subjects. They confined 
their selection of subjects to groups of foreground figures, using 
the background merely as an accessory ; they did not shade their 
pictures up to a point, like the Venetian oil-paintings, but, at 
the expense of unity of composition, represented the figures as 
if seen under the influence of broad sunshine — the figures at the 
extremities of the group thus having the same force of light and 
shade upon them as those in the centre of the group. They were 
well aware of the great effect of shadow in giving distinctness and 
force to a design ; but knowing the defectiveness of glass as a 
medium of shade, they took care to confine their shade within 
small limits. Thus they were very fond of architectural back- 
grounds to their groups, because the soffits of the arches gave 
them the opportunity of introducing very decided shadows, 
though of limited extent — shadows which had the effect of sepa- 
rating the foreground from the background, and giving relief 
and distance. These and many other devices for concealing the 
defectiveness of glass, such as the avoidance of foreshortened 
iigures and the like, will be easily perceived on looking at the 
choir windows of this cathedral, which are perhaps the finest 


specimens of pictorial glass-painting in the world. Compare 
them with the dull heavy works of the last century, in which 
the conditions of glass-painting are wholly overlooked, — as, for 
instance, the great west window of New College, at Oxford, 
painted from a magnificent design of Sir Joshua Keynolds, but 
one unfortunately wholly unstated for the purpose of a glass- 
painting, — and I think you will agree with me in preferring the 
glass-paintings of the first half of the sixteenth century to the 
later examples. Yet let us not condemn the authors of those 
later works as men of unartistic mind. They were, on the con- 
trary, men of high artistic attainments; they fully appreciated 
the obligations of glass-painting to oil-painting : the rock they 
split upon was their overlooking the peculiar conditions of glass- 
painting — the difference between a painting which transmits light 
and one that reflects it. In endeavouring to make gJ ass-painting 
rival oil-painting in all respects, they attempted an impossibility, 
and therefore their works, notwithstanding their high artistic 
merit, are ineffective as compared with those of the middle of 
the sixteenth century. 

The latest windows that I am acquainted with, executed pre- 
cisely as these of Lichfield, are the windows of the transepts and 
of the north aisle of the choir of Brussels Cathedral. They are 
all dated between 1540 and 1549 ; they are coarser in execution 
than these, but are most effective. Indeed 1 do not know any 
works in glass which are so powerful, without in the least degree 
violating the essential conditions of the art. But immediately 
after the middle of the sixteenth century, and in France even a 
little before, we see the attempt to carry the art beyond its 
legitimate limits. The windows of Gouda Church, in Holland, 
magnificent compositions though they be, which were all ex- 
ecuted between 1555 and 1603, are already affected by the 
change ; and the windows in the south aisle of Brussels 
Cathedral, which were executed in the seventeenth century, 
though very fine as artistic compositions, are yet wrong both in 
design and execution. Great effects of light and shade, as in 
Kubens' pictures, were here attempted, at the expense of the 
material, which looks flimsy in the light parts of the picture and 
dull and flat in the shaded parts. It is only necessary to com- 
pare these windows with those on the opposite side, to which I 
have alluded, to be sensible of the great superiority of the prin- 
ciple upon which the latter are designed and executed. Soon 
after this glass-painting seems to have greatly grown out of 
fashion. Works occur only at intervals, and these are executed 


on the principle of an ordinary oil-painting, the composition 
being shaded up to a point and enamel colours used profusely, 
either to heighten the coloured glass, or more commonly in sub- 
stitution of it. At length coloured glass almost ceased to be 
made or used. With the exception of a fine window by Price, 
in the church of St. Andrew's, Holborn, in which some attention 
is paid to the earlier system, all the great works executed in this 
country are done with enamel colour ; as the window at New 
College, Oxford, and the great east window and south window of 
the aisles of St. George's Chapel, Windsor — all which resemble 
bad and dingy paintings, or weakly-coloured window-blinds, though 
their composition is artistic and the execution careful and refined. 
In France and Germany what little glass was executed was done 
in the same manner. 

So matters remained until the revived taste for mediaeval art, 
which commenced here and abroad about thirty years ago, a 
taste which in this country undoubtedly received a great impulse 
at first from the writings of Sir Walter Scott, and of late years 
from the efforts of a small but active party, who seem to have 
made use of the popular feeling as a means to an end — that of 
reviving religious forms and ceremonies calculated to lead men's 
minds towards the Church of Eome, — forms and ceremonies 
which, though not actually condemned at the reformation, can 
hardly be said to be in harmony with it, and were on that account 
wisely dropped by tacit consent in the course of the last two 

In France and Germany the revival has spread more for the 
sake of art than from any particular religious sentiment ; and 
therefore in both countries it has been more conducive to the 
interests of art than with ourselves. In no branch of art has 
this been more remarkable than in glass-painting. 

The French, like ourselves, have done little else than take up 
glass-painting archseologically, and copy old works, though with, 
it must be admitted, far greater success in point of fidelity of 
imitation than the English glass-painters. But in Germany 
the movement has been an artistic one, and has borne great 
fruits. At Munich, glass-painting has for years past been 
carried on as a fine art, by some of the greatest artists in Ger- 
many, in conjunction with a revived style of architecture, not 
Gothic, but a style more severe, yet as symmetrical, magnificent, 
and refined, as that of the sixteenth century. To say that glass- 
painting is correctly practised by the Germans is what I cannot 
do, but I will say, that in point of real art, there are no modern 


glass-paintings in the world to compare with theirs for one 
moment. The defectiveness of their practice is deep and per- 
haps inveterate, — not only do they paint up their glass with 
enamel colours (using however coloured glass for their colours) 
to such an extent as to almost destroy its transparency, but 
they seem to lose sight too much of the contrasted style of 
arranging colours in ancient glass, and of the use of violent con- 
trasts of light and shade, which give the old cinque-cento glass- 
paintings their power and vivacity ; and to pay too much minute 
attention to blending the several local colours, by which an 
harmonious effect is produced at the expense of vigour and force. 
I am aware that the German artists deny their practice of dulling 
down their pictures to be voluntary, and that they excuse it 
by a desire to obtain the harmonious effect of old glass, and to 
obviate the flimsiness and excessive pellucidness of the modern 
material. But one does not see why, if sincere, these artists, 
with Royal patronage to back them, should not attempt to 
make glass like the old. For it is in the glass-house, and in 
the glass-house alone, that we can hope for any real improvement 
in the effect of glass-paintings. It is a fallacy to ascribe the 
harmony of ancient glass to the effect of age. Age does har- 
monize glass to a certain extent, but nothing can supply the 
want of harmonizing coloured glass. 1 

Still, nothing can supply the want of art : and I fear the pre- 
sent depraved state of glass-painting, in this country, is far 
more attributable to this want than to that of good glass — else 
our glass-painters would not be so inferior to the Germans. 
But, however this may be, I declare that the state of glass- 
painting is in England, at the present moment, worse than it 
has ever been at any other time or in any other country. With 
the enormous expenditure of late years upon painted windows, 
we are the laughing-stock of foreigners ; and if a great artistic 
work is required, there is no choice but to go to Munich. This 
has been the decision of the noblemen and gentlemen who 
have subscribed for the painting of the windows of Glasgow 
Cathedral. And though they have been much blamed for it, 
there can be no doubt that they are right. It is idle to say that 
they are to wait until the establishment of a native school capable 
of such works. The best patronage in the end is that which 
always chooses and pays for the best article wherever it can be 
obtained, in matters of art as well as in matters of merchandize. 

1 On the recently altered Munich practice see before, pp. 50, 54. 


Some English glass-painters have, it is true, lately started, and 
it appears that they intend to rival the German artists ; but 
their performance as yet has been only such as to make us think 
that the Germans are likely to maintain their superiority. 

The truth is that glass-painting has got into bad hands. The 
growing archaeological and hierarchical view taken in this 
country by " the movement " has had a retrogressive and not a 
progressive tendency. Patrons and amateurs have been caught 
with details, and have not looked one inch beyond them ; con- 
sequently artists have not come into the field ; but they have left 
the archaeology and details to be done by draughtsmen; and 
there has been no employment, as in Germany, of artists of as 
high a reputation as our Royal Academicians. It is to be hoped 
that people will at last grow sick of archaeology, and ask them- 
selves the plain question, whether in matters of religion we 
ought to be archaeologists at all, or, if archaeologists, whether we 
should not cany our archaeological associations to the earliest 
period of Christianity, — to a period of art which was accepted 
in the sixteenth century, and the influence of which, acting 
upon the gothic element in our natures, made christian art and 
architecture what we see them — the art, higher in true christian 
sentiment than it ever was at any period of the middle ages ; 
and the architecture, as refined as the Roman, yet as varied and 
picturesque as the gothic. I am not ashamed to say that I have 
no sympathy with the " movement " in the sense in which the 
phrase is at present accepted. No man wishes more sincerely 
than I do to spread the blessings of Christianity, and to afford 
to all the opportunity of public worship ; but I do think that we 
should do wisely to turn our backs on the middle ages and then- 
associations, — to accept the reformation as a great fact, which 
it is our duty not to discourage, but to carry out ; renouncing both 
the romanticism of the middle ages, which none of us really feel, 
and those things which remind us of the mediaeval Church, the 
errors of which we have long since abjured. And I believe that, 
acting as we then shall, in the spirit of the nineteenth century, 
the opprobrium will soon cease, that, though giants in science 
and practical skill, we are dwarfs in art, especially in religious 

In bringing these imperfect, but not hasty, observations to a 
close, I would again urge on all those who really Avish to 
have clear notions of glass-painting to study the glass in this 
cathedral. If we once learn to appreciate that, we shall have 
made a great step. We shall then perceive more clearly how 



the earlier style which I first noticed can be developed in a 
manner worthy of us. It is these two styles alone which should 
be studied. The employment of either must depend on circum- 
stances, and the character of the place intended to be decorated 
with glass. The earlier style is more fit for severe buildings, — 
the later for buildings of more ornamental character. They 
will stand well together, and need fear no comparison. The 
greater flatness of the earlier style is no objection to it, provided 
that the figures executed in it do not appear to be flat. An 
appearance of rotundity is compatible with low relief, as we see 
in the head on a coin — and so there can be an artistically flat 
style in glass-painting, and an artistically pictorial style, co- 
existing, and preferable the one to the other according to cir- 



By Charles Winston and Weston Styleman Walford. 
(From the 'Archaeological Journal,' vol. xvii., 1860.) 

HE nave of York Cathedral contains the most 
perfect, and perhaps the most extensive, remains 
of painted glass of the early part of the four- 
teenth century, of which this country can boast. 
All the windows of the aisles (except two), the 
great west window of the nave, and all the clear- 
story windows (except two), retain their original 
glazing, but little mutilated, and as yet, for- 
tunately, not " restored." 

We learn from documents that the foundation of the nave 
was begun on the south side, towards the east, in April, 1291, 
and that an altar, dedicated to St. Edmund, was erected on the 
south side of the nave in 1326 ; which might lead us to seek 
the earliest glazing in those windows of the south aisle which 
are nearest the transept. Want of leisure has prevented us 
from undertaking the complete examination of more than one 
window, namely, that which is the subject of this memoir, the 
first window reckoning from the east in the north aisle of the 
nave. But such an examination of the heraldry in the other 
windows of the nave 1 as we have been enabled to make, appears 
to justify a confident opinion that the earliest glazing is that 
contained in the window about to be described, and, judging 
only by the style of execution, in the window which is next to it 
and known as the Bell-founder's window. 2 In point of style, the 

1 The arnia and heraldic devices in 
the original glazing, which remain in 
these windows, will be noticed in some 
detail at the end of this communication. 

2 The Fabric Rolls of York Cathedral, 
lately published by the Surtees Society, 
do not commence till 1360, long after 

the date of these windows. The great 
west window was probably not erected 
until a few years after the date of the 
contract for it in 1338. The two win- 
dows to which in 1338 about one-fifth 
of the sum given by Archbishop Melton 
for the west window was applied, were 


resemblance which all the aisle windows bear to one another is 
so close as to lead to the belief that there is but little difference 
in date between them ; a belief corroborated by the evidence 
supplied by such of the existing heraldry as is coeval with the 
original glazing of the windows. Some of the clearstory win- 
dows may be of the same date as the latest windows of the 
aisles, some a little later than these ; but they all appear to be 
earlier than the great west window, which is manifestly the 
latest of the series. 

The painted window taken for our subject may be shortly 
described as a white pattern window enriched with coloured 
pictures and ornaments ; a kind of window common to the whole 
Decorated period of glass-painting, and extensively employed in 
these very aisles and clearstories. 1 The general ground of its 
lower lights is of white glass, ornamented with interlacing bands 
and tendril-like scrollages of leaf-work painted in outline. This 
is crossed by two rows of rectangular panels, on each of which is 
represented a canopy enshrining a group of figures. The tracery 
lights are filled with figures and ornaments. Owing to these 
parts of the design being richly coloured, the window in general 
effect is as if it was composed of six alternate horizontal stripes 
of white and coloured glass, its tracery-head forming one of the 
coloured stripes ; although it is true that the transition from the 
one to the other is a good deal modified by the rich tint of 
the glass composing the white stripe, as well as by the con- 
tinuation across it of the coloured borders to the lights, and by 
the insertion, in the white intervals, of coloured panels con- 

probably in the clearstory. Unfor- four easternmost ones in the south, are 
tunately the two missing clearstory similar in general design to the subject 
windows are the one on each side which of this memoir. So are also, in prin- 
was nearest the great west window, the ciple, such of the clearstory windows 
very windows, in short, to which we as retain their glass. Of the two re- 
might naturally infer that the money maining side windows of the south aisle, 
in question was appropriated. ; one is a Jesse, the other has three large 
1 Each aisle of the nave is furnished figures and canojjies, and ouce had a 
with seven side windows and an east small subject beneath each. The west 
window, of three lights each. In the windows of the aisles have each three 
nave is the great west window of eight canopies with figures, and originally 
lights ; and in the cleai'story are eight had a small subject under the centre 
windows on each side, of five lights one only. The great west window* has 
apiece, the two supernumerary win- three tiers of canopies resting on one 
dows being over the western aisles of another, and a strip of ornamental glass 
the transepts. Only the first six, from at the bottom, in its lower lights. The 
the east, of the side windows of each tracery lights of all are variously filled 
aisle retain the original glazing. Of with ornaments, heraldry, or figures, 
these all in the north aisle, and the 



taining shields of arms. The uniformity of the arrangement is 
somewhat broken by the introduction, at the base of the centre 
light, of a coloured panel on which is an effigy of the donor of 
the window. The subjects of the other pictures are taken from 
the legend of St. Catherine. 

In order to facilitate a more detailed description of the design, 
recourse has been had to the diagram, to which the following 
numbers refer : — 

No. 1. On this panel is represented a canopy having a red 
ground to the niche, under which is the kneeling figure of an 
ecclesiastic with tonsured head, and habited in a blue cope and 
hood, an aumuce, the white fur of which is seen about the neck, 
white surplice, purple under-dress, and purple shoes. 

Nos. 2, 3, 4. That figure is unquestionably referred to in an 
inscription in Lombardic capitals, yellow on a black ground, 
which in a mutilated state crosses the window in the direction 
of Nos. 2, 3, and 4. The letters which remain in No. 2 are — 
pur : M — re : piere ; — in No. 3, dene : ke : ceste : f ; — in 
No. 4, re : fist : fe — ; which in all probability may be thus 
read, restoring the missing letters in the blank spaces from 
which the lettering, &c, have been removed: priez : pur : 

FERE : 1 

No. 5. On this panel is represented the first of the series of 
subjects from the legend of St. Catherine. It appears to be 
St. Catherine pleading for the faith before the Emperor Maxi- 
min. A young nimbed female stands before a regal person 
seated on a throne, who, from his angry countenance and up- 
lifted gloved hand, seems to be yielding to the evil suggestions of 
the devil perched on his shoulder. The canopy or shrine under 
which the group is placed is of an ordinary type. The niche 
arch is ornamented with segmental foliations, the niche ground 

1 This inscription had been over- tion of the glass itself with a telescope, 

looked until a few years ago, when Mr. and succeeded in reading the remains 

Niblet, a member of the Institute, of the inscription, which were found 

being in the Cathedral, availed himself to coincide exactly with the copy as 

of a scaffold that had been erected at corrected ; a strong corroboration of its 

this window, and examined the glass; accuracy. "Dene" seems to occur 

and finding some letters, he made a again in a very mutilated inscription 

copy of them, which he showed to one about half-way down one of the lower 

of the writers of this memoir; who, lights of the third window from the 

after a few conjectural corrections, dis- west in the north clearstory of the 

covered that it contained the name of nave. It may, however, be the last 

the donor. His colleague made the syllable of a longer name, 
same discovery on a careful examina^ 



Heraldic Window in the Nave, York Cathedral. 
(Diagram showing ihe arrangement of the design.) 

s 2 


is red, and the ground of the panel on which are the canopy 
spires is coloured blue. The canopy itself is chiefly yellow, but 
some white and bits of other colours are introduced. The 
figures have flesh-coloured faces, and coloured glass predomi- 
nates in their dresses. 

No. 6. The subject of this panel seems to be St. Catherine's 
contention with the philosophers sent by Maximin to confute 
her. Two male figures in civil costume, one wearing the cap 
usually appropriated to theological doctors (the head of the other 
being lost), appear as if they were rebuking a young nimbed 
female who is standing with them. The ground of the canopy 
niche is blue, and that of the spire is red. 

No. 7. The subject of this panel is in a very mutilated state. 
But on examining the remains, and comparing them with the 
inaccurate engraving of this window given by Drake in 173(3, x 
it would seem to be the execution of the philosophers by Maxi- 
min's orders, in revenge for having allowed themselves to be 
converted to the faith by St. Catherine's arguments. On the 
west side of the picture are two pairs of feet, as if originally 
belonging to two standing figures, most likely the two execu- 
tioners. There is on this side also one figure, standing, perfect 
to the waist ; and near it, but not exactly above it, the head and 
shoulders of another figure, with a ferocious countenance, and 
having flowing hair confined with a band. This figure holds in 
its left hand the two wrists, having hands attached, of another 
figure now wanting, and from the sway of the body there can be 
little doubt that the principal figure was originally in the act of 
beheading the figure now wanting (and which we may conclude 
was one of the philosophers), though its right arm has been lost 
or removed. There is, moreover, an indication of a sword-blade 
over the head of the principal figure, in the position it would 
occupy if upraised to strike a blow. At the east corner of the 
picture is a kneeling figure perfect, its hands raised in supplica- 
tion, and with terror depicted in its countenance, representing, 
as we may suppose, the other philosopher. All the figures are 
iu civil costume. The ground of the canopy niche is red, and 
that of the spire is blue. 

No. 8. The subject of this panel is the imprisonment of St. 
Catherine, during which, according to the legend, she was 
attended by angels, and visited by Maximin 's empress and his 
minister Porphyry, both of whom she converted to the faith. 

1 See Drake's ' History of York,' p. 527. 


St. Catherine is represented standing, her hands joined in prayer, 
within a small canopy or tabernacle having a blue external roof 
beneath the niche of the principal shrine. The lower part of 
her person is concealed by some castellated work. A white 
chain proceeds as from her neck, under the fibula of her mantle, 
and is secured at the other end to one of the shafts of the small 
tabernacle. Immediately over her head, and between it and 
the niche arch of the small tabernacle, is an angel, having the 
right hand raised in benediction, and holding in the left a scroll, 
inscribed ave : maria. The letters, which are Lombardic capi- 
tals, are white on a black ground. The convert Porphyry, 
placed on the west side of the small tabernacle, is kneeling, with 
hands joined in prayer, and adoring the saint. His head is 
flesh-coloured ; the hair, which is combed into a large roll on each 
side of the face, is stained yellow ; * and he is habited in a purple 
robe furnished with a hood. Some white is shown, as of an 
under-dress. The shoes are blue. On the opposite side is a 
crowned female, kneeling and adoring the saint, with hands 
joined in prayer. The ground of the niche of the small taber- 
nacle is blue, that of the principal canopy is red, and that of the 
spire is green. 

No. 9. The subject of this pauel is the miraculous deliverance 
of St. Catherine from the punishment of the wheel. The prin- 
cipal figure is standing, with hands joined in prayer, between 
two wheels. The head of the figure is an insertion : it belongs 
to the Perpendicular period. Two executioners lie disabled on 
the ground on the east side of the saint, and two soldiers in 
yellow mail on the other side. Above are two angels with 
swords, striking the wheels and rescuing the saint. The ground 
of the canopy niche is blue, that of the spire is red powdered 
with yellow wavy stars. 

No. 10. The subject of this panel is the beheading of. St. 
Catherine. An executioner is represented beheading a female. 
The head of the saint is an insertion ; it belongs to the Decorated 

1 The yellow stain appears to be discovery of the property long pre. 

more or less used in all the windows ceded its practical application ; for the 

of the aisles. This window affords the silvered tesserae used in the mosaics 

earliest example of its use that we are at St. Mark's, Venice, and also at St. 

at present acquainted with. The stain- Sophia, Constantinople, occasionally ex- 

ing property of silver as applicable to hibit a change from white to yellow of 

glass-painting is said to have been dis- the transparent glass with which the 

covered by the accidental dropping of silver is overlaid, occasioned by its con- 

a silver button into a vessel containing tact with the metal whilst exposed to 

melted glass. It is probable that the heat. 


period. Above are two angels raising up a napkin arranged in 
the form of a festoon. The little figure it originally supported 
has been lost. This may be an allusion either to the carrying of 
the saint's soul to paradise, or, according to the legend, to the 
transportation of her body to Mount Sinai. The ground of the 
canopy niche is red, and that of the spire is red also, but this 
clearly is an insertion, though of glass coeval with the window. 
In all probability it was taken out of one of the aisle win- 
dows, which; as before mentioned, have been deprived of their 

Nos. 11, 11 (in the border of the centre light). Each of 
these spaces is occupied by an angel under a canopy, tossing a 
thurible ; these, as well as the next two subjects, are probably 
allusive to St. Catherine's burial by angels, according to the 

Nos. 12, 12. Each of these spaces is occupied by an angel 
under a canopy, playing on a harp. 

Nos. 13, 14. The subjects of these tracery lights seem also 
allusive to St. Catherine's burial. In both lights are two figures, 
those in No. 13 proceeding in an eastward, those in No. 14 in a 
westward direction. The foremost figure in each case is nimbed, 
and clad in a mantle, long under-dress, and shoes. That in 
No. 14 is tossing a thurible ; its head, which belongs to the Per- 
pendicular period, is an insertion. Neither of the rearmost 
figures is nimbed ; each carries a taper, one coloured green, the 
other pink. The figure in No. 14 is in a white surplice with a 
jewelled band about half way down the skirt. The other appears 
to be in a light brown dress ; it is possible that the dress was 
white like the other, but is discoloured by age. The ground of 
each light is red, ornamented with a white scrollage bearing 
maple-leaves, and the border of the light is green with white 

No. 15. The subject of this light seems to be the reception of 
St. Catherine's soul into heaven. In the upper part are the 
remains of a figure of Christ. The body of the figure is an 
insertion. The left hand clasps a book, the right is open with 
the fingers extended. Below are two angels clad in white, 
kneeling, and raising up a napkin in the form of a festoon. The 
place of the little figure it probably once supported is occupied 
with fragments which, seen from below, are unintelligible. All 
parts of the interior of the light are much mutilated. The head 
of one of the angels belongs to the Perpendicular period, and is 
an insertion; the head of the other is original, and the hair 


is stained yellow. The ground of the light is blue ; its border is 
red with white quatre foils. 

Nos. 16, 16, 16, 16. These remaining four tracery lights are 
filled merely with coloured and white glass. 

Nos. 17, 17. Each of these little circles in the heads of the 
two outer lower lights contains a crowned head nimbed ; possibly 
for St. Edmund and the Confessor. 

No. 18. In this circle is a purple bird, resembling a hawk, on 
a blue ground : probably the device of the donor, and intended 
for the Danish raven, in allusion to his name. 1 

No. 19 is a shield, bearing gu. 2 keys sal tier- wise or, St. Peter, 
the patron of the cathedral. 

No. 20 is a shield on a cinquefoiled panel having a red 
ground and yellow beaded border, bearing or a double-headed 
eagle displayed sab. armed gu., the Emperor. 

No. 21 is a shield on a cinquefoiled panel like the last, but 
having a green ground, bearing gu. three lions passant guardant 
in pale or, England. 

No. 22 is a shield on a red cinquefoil, bearing az. semy of lys 
or, France. 

No. 23 is a shield on a green cinquefoil, bearing paly of six 
or and gu., Provence or Arragon. 

No. 24 is a shield on a red cinquefoil, bearing or an eagle 
displayed sab. armed gu., King of the Romans. 

No. 25 is a shield on a green cinquefoil, bearing quarterly 
1 and 4 gu. a castle or, 2 and 3 arg. a lion rampant purpure, 
Castile and Leon. 

No. 26 is a shield on a green cinquefoil, bearing arg. a cross 
potent between seven cross-croslets or, Jerusalem. 

No. 27 is a shield on a green cinquefoil, bearing gu. an escar- 
buncle or, Navarre. 

No. 28 (in the border of the centre light). Under a small 
canopy, the niche ground of which is green, is represented a 
knight, in white banded mail ornamented with the yellow stain, 
wearing a coiffe de mailles, aud having a spear, belted sword, 
rowel led spurs, and long surcote displaying gu. a cross arg. 

1 In the English of that period Danes lies named Deane have borne ravens, 

and Danish may be found spelt respec- which have been occasionally converted 

tively Deneis and Denez (after the into crows or choughs ; the Denmans 

Anglo-Sax. Dene, Danes). According to have a raven for their crest ; and analo- 

these orthographies Danes' raven and gously several families named Dennis 

Danish raven would differ only in one (variously spelt) have borne Danish 

letter from Dene's raven. Some fami- axes. 


No. 29. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, is 
a knight in yellow banded mail, without a spear, but in other 
respects like the last, on whose surcote is displayed org. a 
cross gu. 

Xo. 30. Under a similar canopy, with red niche ground, 
is a crowned figure in white and yellow-stained mail, without a 
spear, on whose surcote is displayed az. semy of lys or, France. 

No. 31. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, 
is a crowned figure, drawn like the last, whose surcote displays 
gu. 3 lions passant guardant in pale or, England. 

No. 32. Under a similar canopy, with red niche ground, is a 
crowned female figure clad in a green under-dress and a mantle, 
the latter being az. semy of lys or, France. 

No. 33. Under a similar canopy is a crowned female figure, 
whose mantle bears gu. 3 lions passant guardant in pale or, 

No. 31. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, is a 
knight in white and yellow-stained mail, with a spear, and long 
surcote on which is displayed gu. 3 lions passant guardant in 
pale or a label az., Heir apparent of England. The lions in this 
instance look eastwards, but no one conversant with early 
heraldry will attach any importance to this anomaly. 

No. 35. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, is 
a knight clad in banded mail ; he is in the act of raising his 
bacinet from his coiffe de mailles with one hand, the other holds 
a spear. On his surcote is displayed or 3 chevronels gu., Clare. 

No. 36. Under a similar canopy, with red niche ground, is a 
knight in the act of raising the vizor of his bacinet; on his 
surcote is displayed cheeky or and az., Warenne. 

No. 37. Under a similar canopy, having the niche ground 
green, is part of a knight, from the belt downwards, the rest of 
the figure having been destroyed. The part of the surcote which 
remains displays gu. semy of cross-croslets or. The coat, accord- 
ing to Drake's engraving, is gu. a fess between 6 cross-croslets 
or, Beauchamp. 

No. 38. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, is 
a knight, armed like the rest in mail, and with coiffe de mailles, 
&c. The part of the surcote above the belt displays gu. 3 water 
budgets arg., Eos. The white belt hangs down in front, con- 
cealing the charge, if any, on the lower half of the surcote. 

No. 39. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, is 
a knight, armed like the rest. His surcote, which is much 
mutilated, displays gu. a lion rampant arg., Mowbray. 


No. 40. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, is 
a knight whose surcote displays cheeky or and az. a fess gu., 

No. 41. Under a similar canopy is a knight whose surcote 
displays or a lion rampant az., Percy. 

The two other lights are bordered with the following devices, 
a yellow lion rampant on a red ground, and a white eagle dis- 
played, having its beak and claws stained yellow, on a green 
ground. These devices are placed alternately, so that the eagle 
is at the very top, and the lion in the middle of the bottom 
of each light. The lions and eagles on the western sides of the 
lights look towards the east ; those on the eastern sides of 
the lights look towards the west. 

Of Master Peter de Dene, whose name appears in the above- 
mentioned inscription, so little is generally known, that we may, 
perhaps, be excused for inserting a sketch of his life, especially 
as it will materially assist us in ascertaining the date of this 
window, and in appropriating, more precisely than we otherwise 
could, the various coats of arms which it displays. He was 
a " Doctor utriusque juris :" and it was probably with reference 
to this academical degree that the term " Magister " was usually 
applied to him ; though that was, we conceive, more commonly, 
as well as more properly, used to designate those who had 
graduated in Arts. He was also a canon or prebendary of the 
cathedral churches of York, London, and Wells, and of the colle- 
giate churches of Southwell and Wimbourne Minster. 1 Of his 
birth, parentage, or early history we have no particulars. If, as 
seems most probable, his family was of little or no consideration, 
he must have had great abilities or very influential friends to 
enable him to acquire so much preferment. From some events 
in his life there is reason to believe that he was born about 
1260 ; hardly much before that year, for we shall see he was 
living in 1332, and then evidently not a very old man, or at 
least not very infirm. The earliest mention of him that has 
been discovered is in 1295, when he was summoned with the 
justices and others to assist at a parliament to be held at West- 
minster. 2 In 1297 he appears to have been one of the council 
of Prince Edward, in which he was associated with several 
bishops, earls, barons, and others, among whom was William de 
Grenefeud (or, according to modern orthography, Greenfield), 

1 See hia Will, Scriptures decern, col. 2037. - Pail. Writs, i. p. 29. 


canon of York ; l no doubt the future chancellor and archbishop 
of that name. He is not the only canon there mentioned, and 
we may reasonably assume that, had Peter de Dene been then 
a canon, he would have been so designated. The Prince, after- 
wards Edward II., was at that time about thirteen years of age. 
We next meet with Peter de Dene in 1300, when the abbot and 
convent of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, granted him a pension 
of 101. a year, 2 a substantial annuity at that period. Though he 
could not then have been much more than forty years of age, if 
so old, the purpose and conditions of the grant show him to have 
been a person of acknowledged learning, ability, and influence ; 
for he engaged to be faithful all his life to the abbot and convent, 
and to undertake their causes and business within the kingdom 
of England when they came to his knowledge, and especially all 
disputes between them and the archbishop, prior, and archdeacon 
of Canterbury ; with whom, being their neighbours, differences, 
we may presume, not unfrequently arose. In 1302 he and also 
William de Greenfield were summoned, as two of the King's 
Clerks, to appear before the Chancellor, Langton, to advise on 
some arduous affairs of the King. 3 We find him in 1304 
claiming to be a canon of London, and complaining that his 
vote had not been allowed on the election of Kalph de Baldock 
to that see : in the course of the dispute he appealed to the 
Pope, but we learn from a bull of Clement V. that he did not 
prosecute the appeal to a decision. 4 

He Avas summoned with the justices and others to assist at 
various parliaments held in the 28th, 29th, 30th, and 33rd 
years of Edward I., and also to attend the parliament to be held 
at Carlisle, to advise the King preparatory to his intended expe- 
dition into Scotland, which was frustrated by his death. 5 That 
parliament assembled on the 30th of May, 1307, at which time 
Peter de Dene appears to have been domiciled at York, as 
domestic chaplain and chancellor to the Archbishop, and a 
canon of the cathedral ; for on the 31st of January in that year 
Archbishop Greenfield, who appears to have become one of his 
patrons, desired the dean and chapter to admit "Magistrum 
Petrum de Dene clericum domesticum commensalem et cancel- 
larium nostrum Eboracensis ecclesie canonicum " to the next 

1 Pari. Writs, i. p. 62. A Rymer, i. p. 930. 

2 Thorn's Chron., Scriptores decern, 5 Pari. Writs, i. pp. 83, 91, 113, 138, 
col. 1979. 182. 

3 Pari. Writs, i. p. 110. 


vacant dignity in the cathedral. 1 How long he had held those 
offices, or afterwards continued to hold them, does not appear ; 
but his connexion with York commenced, in all probability, 
under Greenfield, who was appointed to the archbishopric in 
December, 1304. Though styled " canonicum," he has not 
been found actually filling any particular stall at York so early 
as 1307. In Le Neve's Fasti, by Hardy, he is mentioned as 
prebendary of Gevendale in 1312, but this has been found to be 
an error. 2 Though we have good reason to believe he held the 
prebend of Grindall at a later period, the time of his appoint- 
ment to that stall does not appear. It was filled by another 
person in August, 1308, and therefore he must have succeeded 
to it after that date. He is not called canon in the inscription 
on the window, yet the kneeling figure, which, no doubt, was 
intended to represent him, is in a habit closely resembling that 
of a canon. On the 4th of August, 1308, the Archbishop allowed 
Peter de Dene, canon of York, and rector of Elneley (probably 
Emly, near Huddersfield), to choose a confessor; and on the 
30th of October, 1309, he received permission to let his living of 
Elneley to farm, and to be non-resident for three years. The 
following day his term of non-residence was extended to seven 
years. On the 11th of April, 1309, the Archbishop made him 
his vicar-general during his absence from the diocese. On the 
19th of October, 1311, Master Peter de Dene, rector of Elneley, 
had again the Archbishop's permission to choose a confessor ; 
and on the same clay a commission was issued, authorising 
William de Pickering, the Dean of York, and John de Nassing- 
ton senior, canon, to inquire how it happened that he held two 
livings, the rectory of Elneley and the living of Emelden in the 
diocese of Durham (perhaps Embledon, in Northumberland). 
On the 24th of September, 1312, he is again called canon 
of York, and appointed vicar-general of the Archbishop. 3 

Though he had become thus intimately connected with the 
cathedral church of York, he had not separated himself from 
the monastery of St. Augustine, Canterbury. We learn from the 

1 Greenfield's Register. by John de Sandall in April, 1313, 

8 We learn from the Rev. James under a Papal provision; and that there 

Raine, to whose kindness we are in- was some dispute about the appoint- 

debted for such of the particulars re- ment, and Peter de Dene was one of 

lating to Peter de Dene as have been those commissioned to inquire into it ; 

derived from Archbishop Greenfield's which would hardly have been the case, 

Register, that William de Pickering, had Peter himself claimed the prebend 

who had held this prebend, died on the in question. 

7th of April, 1312, and was succeeded 3 Greenfield's Register. 


chronicler of that house, that in the same year (1312) he had 
certain spiritual benefits conferred on him in return for the 
temporal benefits and services that he had rendered to the abbot 
and convent. He had been, it appears, a constant defender of 
them, and in time of need had given them two hundred marcs ; 
besides this he had erected, at his own expense, certain buildings 
on the north side of the chapel of the infirmary, which bore his 
name. Induced by these services and benefactions, the abbot 
and convent granted that three monks should pray daily at three 
different altars for him, and for the souls of his parents, relatives, 
and benefactors, and for his own soul after his death ; and also 
that an anniversary for himself and his parents should be cele- 
brated on St. Margaret's day during his life, and, after his 
decease, on the day of his death.' No names being mentioned, 
we learn nothing from this transaction as to who were his parents 
or benefactors ; as the souls of the former were to be prayed for, 
we may assume they were then dead. 

He was again vicar-general of the Archbishop during his 
absence in June, 1313 ; 2 and in the same year he is styled canon 
of York, and vicar-general of the Archbishop, in a return made, 
the 30th of July, to a mandate directing an inquiry as to the 
goods of the Knights Hospitallers. 3 In 1316 he was one of 
eleven " Magistri " that were desired by the King to assist with 
their counsel the Bishops of Norwich and Ely and the Earl of 
Pembroke, who were about to proceed on an embassy to the 
Pope. 4 It related probably to the affairs of the King with 
the Scots, since, in the ensuing year, the Pope attempted to 
negotiate a peace between the two kingdoms, which the Scots, 
apparently with reason, considered much to their disadvantage. 

Peter de Dene resigned his living of Elneley in February, 
1317-18, which was then valued at seventy marcs per annum, 5 
a good income at that time. He had been summoned to assist 
at various parliaments held in the 8th, 9th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 
14th, and 15th years of Edward II. 6 A change now came over 
his fortune. We find that on the 2nd of June, 1322, John 
Gifford, by reason of a provision made for him by the Pope, was 
admitted to the stall of Grindall, which was then vacant " per 
ingressum religionis Magistri Petri de Dene et professionem 

1 Thorn's Chron., Scriptores decern, 5 Greenfield's Register. 

col. 2012. 6 Pari. Writs, vol. ii. part i. pp. 138, 

2 Greenfield's Register. 153, 174, 170, 179, 183, 198, 216, 220, 
: * Kellaw's Register, Durham. 230, 24-6. 

4 Rymer, ii. p. 305. 


ejus." 1 Master Peter was then probably about sixty-two years 
of age ; and this withdrawal from active life might be supposed 
to have been in order to spend the evening of his days in the 
peaceful retirement of a cloister. But it was, in fact, the com- 
mencement of troubles which saddened the remainder of his 

After the execution of Thomas Earl of Lancaster, which 
quickly followed his defeat at Boroughbridge in 1322, the power 
of the Despencers became predominant. Severe measures were 
forthwith adopted against such of his adherents as had not either 
fallen in battle or been made prisoners ; and Peter de Dene, who 
was believed to have been one, found himself in great jeopardy. 
His connection with the Lancastrian party does not previously 
appear. His uninterrupted success would seem to justify us in 
assuming that till this reverse his conduct had been generally 
approved of by the King and his friends. The fact of his having 
been appointed one of the advisers of the ambassadors sent to 
Rome by the King in 1316, rather tends to show he was not then 
a Lancastrian. For though the Bishop of Norwich, John Salmon, 
and the Earl of Pembroke, Aymer de Valence, two of those 
ambassadors, had been also two of the commissioners forced upon 
Edward in 1310, by the Lancastrians, for the better regulation of 
the affairs of his kingdom and household, yet this bishop was 
in 1312 placed at the head of a commission, consisting of the 
Kino's friends, to correct the ordinances which had been made 
by the former commissioners, and he was chancellor in 1320. 
And as regards the Earl of Pembroke, though he had joined the 
Earl of Lancaster against Gavaston, the murder of the latter by 
the order, or at least with the approval, of the Earls of Lancaster, 
Hereford, and Warwick, in 1312, after Pembroke, to whom he 
had surrendered, had engaged to spare his life, not only made 
this Earl lukewarm in their cause, but seems to have led to his 
eventually abandoning their party. The other ambassador, John 
Hotham, had been recently raised to the see of Ely. Little is 
known of his previous political attachments. He had been one 
of the King's chaplains and chancellor of the exchequer, and 
been sent by Edward on a mission to Ireland ; but as he was 
Chancellor of England from 1318 to 1320, at which time Lan- 
caster was influential, we may assume he was not regarded by 
that Earl as an adversary. From the rigour of the persecution 
against Peter de Dene, it seems probable that he had by some 

Greenfield's Register. 


means given great offence to the King's party. The chronicler 
of St. Augustine's, however, says it was without his fault, and 
speaks of the enemies of Peter as noble and powerful, but does 
not give any of their names. They were intent not only on his 
capture and imprisonment and the depriving him of his property, 
but even sought his life — a degree of enmity which may warrant 
a suspicion that some tergiversation was imputed to him. In 
this state of things, unable to resist his adversaries, he had 
recourse to the monastery which he had so faithfully served and 
liberally benefited ; and he there took on himself the habit of a 
monk in 1322. His position, however, was still such that he was 
able to make terms with the abbot and convent on his admission : 
he neither took all the usual vows nor gave up all his property. 
He was to retain some houses (domos) that he had built within 
the monastery, and his secular attendants, and also certain per- 
sonal property to be disposed of as he thought fit, and the use of 
some silver plate as long as he lived. He was not bound to 
attend with the other monks in the church, chapter, refectory, 
dormitory, cloister, or elsewhere, either for Divine service or for 
any other purpose ; but was to be allowed to remain with his 
attendants in his own chamber day and night, and give himself 
to prayer, contemplation, study, and other becoming (honestis) 
occupations as he might be disposed. 1 For several years he 
conducted himself very creditably and satisfactorily. He taught 
canon law to the monks and others, gave counsel to the abbot 
and seniors iu the house, conducted their most private and diffi- 
cult affairs, and was allowed a reasonable time to walk about 
both within and without the walls of the monastery. At length, 
growing weary of this kind of existence, and having no longer 
any apprehension from his enemies without, he was desirous of 
returning to secular life. He mentioned this again and again to 
the abbot and convent ; but they deferred the consideration of 
the matter, and would not consent to his departure. They were 
probably the more unwilling to offend him, or that he should 
leave them, because, on being admitted, he had made his will 
and bequeathed to them several highly esteemed and valuable 
books on canon law, and also the greater part of his money 
and plate. Frustrated in his endeavours to obtain permission to 
depart, he meditated means of escape. At that time the rector 

1 Thorn's Chron , Script, decern., col. Tertiarii were those attached to reli- 

2036-8, 2055. In consequence of the gious houses who took only some of the 

qualified profession which he made, it vows, and were not strictly monks. See 

is said " de tercia professionem emisit.'' Du Cange, Tertiarius. 


of St. Martin's church, Canterbury, was one John de Bourne. 
The outer wall of the abbey, if it did not then actually adjoin 
his churchyard, was separated from it only by a narrow way. 
He had a brother, George de Bourne, who possessed a house at 
Bishopsbourne, about four miles from Canterbury. With these 
two brothers the discontented monk concerted a plan for his 
escape, and was to pay them 10Z. for their assistance. On the 
day of St. Lucia (December 13), 1330, John, the rector of St. 
Martin's, came by invitation to dine with the infirmarer of the 
abbey ; and during dinner he rose from table, and, pretending 
some business required his attention, he went to the chamber of 
Peter de Dene and had a long conversation with him. In the 
evening at supper Peter mentioned to his attendant that he had 
celebrated mass that day, but should not on the morrow, and 
therefore desired that he might not be disturbed in his morning's 
sleep ; for he was accustomed, notwithstanding the easy terms 
on which he was admitted, to rise at midnight to perform the 
offices usual at that hour. His servant, after waiting some time, 
retired to rest in another chamber, leaving a boy with his master, 
and the door unlocked. Before midnight, having thrown off his 
monk's habit, he withdrew, accompanied by the boy. They took 
with them six dishes and six saucers (salsaria), probably part of 
the silver, the use of which when he entered lie had stipulated 
to retain, and, passing through his own cellar to a gate which led 
to the garden of the cellarer, the lock of which they had broken, 
they found their way to the abbey-wall opposite St. Martin's 
church. There they made a preconcerted signal to notify their 
arrival, by throwing over a stone ; and the rector, and his 
brother, and two other persons who had brought three horses to 
the spot, came and placed two ladders against the abbey- wall ; 
and two of them ascending the wall seated themselves on it, and 
having drawn up one of the ladders, let it down on the other side 
into the garden. Peter and the boy having got over the wall, 
the former was placed on horseback and conducted through 
Bromden 1 to George de Bourne's house. On the flight of the 
monk being discovered, there was a great commotion in the mo- 
nastery, and inquiries were made in all directions for the fugitive. 
At length it became known that he was concealed at Bishops- 
bourne. The house was watched all night, and on searching it 

1 Probably a close or piece of land ted, vol. iv. p. 443. The object in 
also called Bromedowne, lying nearly crossing that was most likely to avoid 
behind St. Martin's church. See Has- detection. 


the next day he was found carefully rolled np in a bundle of 
canvas. He was brought back to St. Augustine's and confined 
in the infirmary. The chronicler proceeds to relate in detail how 
he was treated, and the consequences of this flagrant breach of 
discipline. Peter de Dene contended that his qualified vows did 
not oblige him to remain in the monastery, and he appealed to 
the Pope. A bull in his favour was in due time produced, the 
genuineness of which was questioned by the abbot and convent. 1 
The result is not clearly given ; but it should seem that he 
eventually submitted to the abbot, and probably died in the 
monastery. We have seen that his stall at York was not filled 
up till 1332, when the proceedings respecting him were drawing 
to a close. That he should have been allowed to retain it at all, 
after he had entered the monastery, is remarkable. On one 
occasion he is represented as saying that, "if he were young and 
able-bodied (corjjore 'potens), he would willingly go to the Court 
of Rome" to complain of the conduct of the Prior of Christ 
Church and others, who had interposed on his behalf. The par- 
ticulars of his flight and concealment do not imply any great age 
or infirmity of body, but are consistent with the supposition that 
lie was not more than seventy years of age, if he were really 
so old. 

There can be no doubt, we think, that this Master Peter de 
Dene is the person mentioned in the inscription remaining in the 
window above described ; indeed, no other person of the name 
has been found to whom it can with any probability be referred. 
Let us, then, consider the window with a view to ascertain the 
period of the donor's life to which the glass may be most rea- 
sonably ascribed. The heraldry, the figures, and the style and 
execution are the elements that are most available for this pur- 
pose. The probable date inferable from the style and execution 
has already been stated. In heraldry displayed on escutcheons 
and surcotes the window is remarkably rich ; and, what is very 
unusual in glass of that age, not a single coat is wholly missing. 

First of the escutcheons of arms : they are chiefly those of 
sovereigns, yet clearly several of them were not contemporaries 
with the donor; for at no time to which the execution of the 
glass can be reasonably attributed were there living an Emperor 
of Germany, a King of the Romans, a King of Jerusalem, and a 
Count of Provence or King of Aragon, whom it is at all likely 
Peter de Dene intended to compliment. The escutcheons seem 

1 Thorn's Chron., Scriptures decern., coll. 20.55-2066. 


rather to have had a genealogical object, and to have indicated 
some of the most distinguished alliances and connections of the 
reigning sovereign of England. Reckoning from the west, in the 
first light are the arms of the Emperor, Provence or Aragon, and 
Jerusalem ; in the second those of England, and most probably 
the King of the Romans; and in the third those of France, 
Castile and Leon, and Navarre. This remai'kably early example 
of the double-headed eagle may be referred to Frederic IF, who 
married Isabella, the sister of Henry III., and aunt, consequently, 
of Edward I. ; Provence (for this, rather than Aragon, the coat 
paly of six or and gu} may, we think, be safely assumed to be) 
to Queen Eleanor of Provence, daughter of Count Raymond and 
mother of Edward I. ; and Jerusalem to Guy and Almeric de 
Lusignan, successively Kings of Jerusalem, whose nephew, Hugh 
le Brun, Count of La Marche, was the stepfather of King 
Henry III. The single-headed eagle, associated with that with 
two heads at this early period (a curious and interesting fact on 
which we shall have more to say presently), may be attributed 
to Richard King of the Romans, the brother of Henry III., and 
uncle, consequently, of Edward I. France may have been placed 
there in compliment to Margaret, daughter of Philip the Hardy, 
and second queen of Edward I., whom he married in September, 
1299 ; Castile and Leon in memory of his former queen, Eleanor 
of Castile ; and Navarre as an additional compliment to Queen 
Margaret, whose brother, Philip the Fair, had become King 
of Navarre by his marriage with Joan, daughter and heiress of 
Henry I. of Navarre, in 1284, the year before his accession to 
the throne of France. These alliances, though of little value for 
ascertaining the date of the glass, accord in several respects 
better with Edward I. than with his son Edward II. ; for, if 
France and Navarre, and Castile and Leon, would suit equally 
well with the latter, whose queen Isabella was daughter of Philip 
the Fair, and his mother Eleanor of Castile, the Emperor, Pro- 
vence, Jerusalem, and the King of the Romans would be removed 
one generation further from the English sovereign then upon the 

It has been mentioned that both of the outer lights in this 
window are bordered with the following devices alternately, viz., 
a yellow lion rampant on a red ground, and a white eagle dis- 

1 Though these arms are generally or p. 320, and also in a Roll of the thir- 
four pallets gu., they sometimes occur teenth century in the Harleian Collec- 
paly or and g"., as in Mr. Stacey Gri- tion, No. 6589. 
maldi's Roll, Collectanea Topog., vol. ii. 



played on a green ground. The lions and eagles on the western 
sides look to the east, and those on the eastern sides to the west ; 
but variations of this sort in heraldic figures were at that time 
deemed of no importance. It is not possible to speak positively 
as to the significance of these devices. They are most likely 
of heraldic origin. The lions may have referred to Edmund 
FitzAlan, Earl of Arundel, who bore gu. a lion ramp. or. As to 
the eagles there is greater difficulty ; for no one is known to 
have borne vert an eagle or several eagles displayed arg., who is 
at all likely to have been complimented in this window. Gavaston 
bore vert three or six eagles displayed or ; and had these eagles 
been yellow, we should certainly have thought them referable to 
him. The heraldic tinctures were in such borders not unfre- 
quently changed, most probably for artistic effects in colour. 
There is an example of this in the border of the first window, 
reckoning from the east, in the south aisle, where we find white 
castles on a red ground, intended, no doubt, for Castile, which 
Mas gu. a castle or. We are therefore disposed to regard these 
eagles, though they are white, as having been complimentary to 
Gavaston ; especially as his arms were in one of the clearstory 
windows, and as in the borders of the west windows of both aisles 
the eagles are yellow. Those borders consist of castles and 
eagles displayed, one above the other, both yellow, not on a 
ground, but separated by pieces of glass per pale red and green, 
the tinctures of the respective shields of Castile and Gavaston. 
It will be remembered Gavaston was killed in 1312. As the 
favourite of Prince Edward, he was most likely known to Peter 
de Dene when the latter was of that Prince's council. Owing to 
his evil influence over the Prince, he was banished by Edward I. 
in 1307 ; but Edward II. immediately on his accession, which 
occurred about three months after, recalled him, created him 
Earl of Cornwall, and married him to his own niece, one of the 
daughters of his sister Joan of Acre by her first husband, Gilbert 
de Clare, Earl of Gloucester. Had this window been executed 
after those events, and the royal favourite been complimented 
in it at all, we think it would not have been in this obscure 

Let us now examine the arms on the surcotes of the figures in 
the border of the middle light, and see what evidence they will 
furnish. It will be best to take these figures in pairs as they 
stand opposite each other. The two uppermost appear to be 
knights in mail with long surcotes, on which are respectively gu. 
a cross arg., and arg. a cross gu. But that he has no nimbus, the 


latter might be supposed to be St. G-eorge ; the other is also 
without a nimbus. We find in the printed Roll t. Edward II. these 
arms borne by two knights respectively ; the former by Sir Henry 
de Cobham the uncle, and the latter by Sir Michael de Herte- 
clawe. In the printed Roll t. Henry III. the former are ascribed 
to Peter de Savoy, and the latter to Robert de Vere. Peter de 
Savoy was an uncle of Queen Eleanor of Provence, the mother 
of Edward I. ; but, seeing the figures which follow, there is no 
good reason why he or any of the knights by whom these arms 
were borne should have been represented above the kings and 
queens of France and England. These crosses, it will be remem- 
bered, are those which were respectively borne by the Hospitallers 
and Templars ; and these two figures may have been intended 
not for individuals, but as representatives of those two leading 
military orders. Figures of two knights with similar arms on 
their cyclases and shields formerly existed in one of the windows 
of Bristol cathedral of about the same period, and were probably 
meant to represent those two orders. The next two figures in 
this border are kings ; one with France on his surcote, and the 
other with England. The next two are queens ; one with France 
on her dress, and the other with England : it is remarkable that 
neither bears any other arms than her husband's. The next two 
are knights, one bearing on his surcote England with a label az., 
the arms at that time of the eldest son of the King of England, 
and the other Clare Earl of Gloucester. The next two are also 
knights, one bearing Warenne Earl of Surrey, and the other the 
remains of the coat of Beauchamp Earl of Warwick. The next 
are also knights, one bearing Ros of Hamlake, and the other 
Mowbray. The last two are also knights, one bearing Clifford, 
and the other Percy. The last four knights were also barons. 
All these figures appear to represent full-grown persons, without 
any intentional differences of age, and, with the exception of the 
first two, may, we think, be assumed to have been meant for por- 
traitures of persons living, or but recently deceased, when the 
window was designed. If so, the coat of England with a label 
az. shows there was then an heir apparent to the throne of 
England old enough to bear arms, and to be represented as an 
adult knight ; and this must have been either Edward II. or 
Edward III. in the lifetime of his father. There are several 
reasons for believing that it could not have been the latter. He 
was not born till November, 1312, and therefore in 1322, when 
the Earl of Lancaster was put to death, and Peter de Dene took 
refuge in St, Augustine's, that prince was only ten years of age. 

T 2 


If this glass were executed after the donor had attached himself 
to the Lancastrian party, it was most likely after 1316, and we 
should in all probability have had in it the arms of the Earl of 
Lancaster and other leaders of that party ; whereas, although the 
arms of Warwick, who died in that year, are there, those of 
Lancaster and Hereford are not ; yet these two Earls were re- 
spectively the first-cousin and brother-in-law of Edward II. If 
it be supposed that the object of the donor was to propitiate the 
King on some occasion when the royal authority was triumphant 
over the Lancastrians, we would ask, why then have we the arms 
of Warwick, to whom Gavaston's death was principally due, and 
not those of Despencer, the then all powerful favourite ? Why, 
too, those of the Earl of Gloucester, who was killed in 1314, and 
not those of the young princes, Thomas of Brotherton and Ed- 
mund of Woodstock, the brothers of Edward II., the younger of 
whom was eleven years older than their nephew Prince Edward ? 
The last of the Clares Earls of Gloucester fell at Bannockburn. 
He was so young, not having been born till 1291, that his arms 
could hardly have been placed in this window, except as those of 
a prince of the blood royal, having been a grandson of Edward I. ; 
and therefore he was not likely to have been thus commemorated 
after his death. The long surcotes and the rest of the costume 
of the figures also claim rather an earlier date than the time 
when Prince Edward, afterwards Edward III., might be expected 
to have been represented as an adult knight. If, moreover, the 
two uppermost figures are a Hospitaller and a Templar, it is 
improbable that the latter would have been placed in this window 
after the order of the Templars had fallen into disgrace and been 
actually abolished in 1312. The earlier in the reign of Edward II. 
this glass is supposed to have been executed, the less probable is 
it that the coat of England with a label az. should be that of his 
son Prince Edward ; and it is difficult to believe the window 
could have been presented after the donor became a monk in 
1322. It is surely far more probable that the heir apparent to 
the throne was Prince Edward, afterwards Edward II., though 
then it must be referred to the very end of his father's reign ; for 
it cannot be so early as 1296, when the previous Clare Earl of 
Gloucester died, and when we have no reason to suppose Peter 
de Dene was in any way connected with the cathedral of York. 
Indeed, his interest in this cathedral appears to have been clue 
to the patronage of Archbishop Greenfield, and did not therefore 
commence before 1305, that prelate having been appointed to 
the see in December, 1304. The young Earl of Gloucester was 


only sixteen years of nge when Edward I. died ; and John de 
Warenne, Earl of Surrey, who should also seem to have been 
represented in consequence of his connexion with the royal 
family, did not marry the king's niece till 130G. At that time 
Peter de Dene was about forty-six years of age : his career had 
been successful, and his benefactions in money and buildings to 
the monastery of St. Augustine, Canterbury, show that for some 
time previous to 1312 he had not lacked either the means or the 
disposition to be munificent. 

In 1306 or the following year the figures in the border of the 
middle light might have represented the following persons, viz. : 
A Hospitaller and a Templar; Edward I. and Philip the Fair; 
Margaret Queen of England, and Joan of Navarre Queen of 
France, who died in 1304, or the Queen-Dowager of France, 
Mary of Brabant, the mother of Margaret Queen of England ; 
Prince Edward, and Gilbert de Clare Earl of Gloucester ; John 
de Warenne Earl of Surrey, and Guy de Beauchamp Earl of 
Warwick; Sir William de Eos of Hamlake, and Sir John de 
Mowbray ; Sir Kobert de Clifford and Sir Henry Percy, Of these, 
Warwick, Kos, Mowbray, Clifford, and Percy had distinguished 
themselves in the war with the Scots. Peter de Dene may 
have made their acquaintance in the north, even if he had not 
done so at some of the numerous parliaments which he had 
attended, or he may have been indebted to them for advance- 
ment or other favours ; as their figures were most probably 
placed in this window from either friendship or gratitude. We 
may add, that Clifford fell at Bannockburn (1314), Percy died 
in 1315, and Warwick in 1316, all leaving heirs under age; 
and though these noblemen may have been so commemorated 
after their deaths, it is more likely that this should have been 
done while they were living. 

On a careful review of all the preceding facts and observa- 
tions, we think the conclusion which they warrant is, that the 
glass of this window was executed certainly in the first quarter 
of the fourteenth century, and most probably in 1306, or in 1307 
before the accession of Edward II. 

It remains that we should add a few words on the occurrence 
in this window of an eagle with two heads, and another with one 
head only, both sa. on a field or. We do not think that any 
difference of opinion as to their application can affect the con- 
clusion at which we have arrived respecting the date of the 
glass, and we hope to show good ground for believing them to 
have been meant for the arms of an Emperor of Germany and 


a King of the Romans ; though it is generally supposed that 
this application of these two heraldic forms of the eagle is not 
older than the beginning of the fifteenth century, and that the 
two-headed eagle was not used by the Western Emperors till 
Wenceslaus (1378-1400). German writers, as Gudenus and 
Oetter, 1 state positively that an eagle with two heads occurred 
on some of the seals of the Emperors Charles IV. and Wen- 
ceslaus, but do not specify them. It is not to be found on any 
of their seals engraved by Vredius, nor have we met with a 
representation or description of such a seal. According to 
Oetter, this device was in use long before it appeared on any 
seal, and it originated in the junction of the eagle of the king- 
dom of Germany with that of the Empire, in the manner called 
by heralds dimidiation. Among the arguments to prove that 
it was the ensign or banner of the Empire in the twelfth and 
thirteenth centuries, he has quoted passages from writers of 
those times, where the plural, aquilce, is supposed to have been 
applied to it. One instance is from a letter of our Queen 
Eleanor in 1193 to Pope Oelestine, invoking his influence for 
the liberation of her son King Richard, 2 where she says, " Christi 
crux antecellit Cassaris aquilas;" but this may admit of a different 
interpretation. Whatever may have been the origin of the 
device, an eagle with two heads is found on two gold coins of 
Louis of Bavaria, as emperor, whose accession was in 1314 ; 
and there is no reason to think this was the first use of it, 
though no earlier example has come down to our times. Two 
seals of his sons, William and Albert, are engraved by Vredius, 
which have their arms on an eagle with two heads, in accordance 
with an occasional practice of the sons of emperors showing their 
connection with the Empire by placing their arms on an eagle. 
Coins or medals (numi) of the Empresses Elizabeth and Katherine, 
the wives of Albert I. and Henry VII., are said to have on them 
the double-headed eagle, 3 but of these we have seen no example. 
The earliest instance that we have discovered of the two-headed 
eas;le being attributed to the Emperor, and the eagle with one 
head to the King of the Eomans, is in a MS. in the Harleian 
collection, 4 which purports to be a copy of a Roll of Arms t. 
Henry III. The original unfortunately is lost. The occasion 
of its compilation it is not easy to conjecture. The MS. com- 

1 Oetter, Wappenbelustigung, 1. stuck, been able to meet with. 
s. 117, and, as there cited, Gudeni 2 Rymer, vol. i. p. 08. 
JSylloge, var. diplom., p. 19. The work 3 Heineccius de Sigillis, p. 1 1. 
of Zyllesius, also referred to, I have not 4 No. 6589, towards the end. 


prises foreign and English coats, and begins, " L'Empereur de 
Almaine d'or ung egle espany ove deux testes sable ;" next conies 
the Emperor of Constantinople ; and then " Le Roy de Almaine 1 
d'or un egle displaye sable ; Le Roy d'Engleterre gules a trois 
leopards d'or ; Le Roy de France d'aznre seme de (a lys is here 
sketched) or." The copyist has probably modernised some of 
the spelling according to the usage of his day. The arms 
of England, it will be observed, are the same that were borne 
before those of France were quartered with them in 1339 or 
1340 ; and those of France are what were borne before the fleurs- 
de-lys were reduced to three by Charles VI. As the copy of 
this roll contains as many foreign as English coats, it is hardly 
practicable to verify the whole ; but we may mention, as indi- 
cations of an early date, that, while we have remarked in it 
nothing which requires it to be referred to a period later than 
the thirteenth century, the arms of the Count of Hainault are 
" cheveronnee de or et de sable," the ancient coat which was 
discontinued before 1300 ; the arms of the Earl of Warwick are 
" eschekere d'or et d'azure un cheveron d'ermin," the old coat of 
Newburgh, the last earl of which family died 1242 ; those of 
the Earl of Pembroke are " party d'or et vert un leon rampant 
gulez," the arms of Marshal, the last earl of which family died 
in 1245 ; those of the Earl of Albemarle are " gules un crois 
patee de veire," last borne probaby by the earl who died in 1259 ; 
and those of the Earl of Winchester are " gules poudre a faux 
losengez d'or," for those of De Quincy, the last earl of which 
family died in 1264. The coat of Geoffrey de Segrave is " sable 
a trois garbes d'argent," which we learn from the Siege of Car- 
laverock had been abandoned for a lion by the father of the 
Nicholas Segrave there mentioned. Several of the English 
names are the same that are in the Roll t. Henry III., published 
by Sir Harris Nicolas, and probably the Roll under considera- 
tion is not much later than that. There is a very inaccurate 
copy of it, evidently from another exemplar, printed in Leland's 
' Collectanea,' ii. p. 610. 2 

1 It may be needless to mention that blazoned later by different persons. We 
the King of Germany and the King of must not fail to notice that in the Roll t. 
the Romans were the same person. In Edward III., published in Collectanea 
like manner the Emperor of Germany Topog., vol. ii. p. 320, an eagle is attri- 
was styled Emperor of the Romans. buted to the Emperor without any men- 

2 It is not improbable that in the tion of its having two heads, showing 
original Roll the arms were drawn and that in this country the notions on the 
coloured, and that they have been subject were by no means uniform. 


The Roll above described is not the only other early instance 
of the two-headed eagle for Germany found here. Among the 
various pavement tiles in this country which are usually ascribed 
with considerable probability to about 1300, occurs an eagle 
displayed, generally with one head, but occasionally with two 
heads. These tiles have been referred with good reason to 
Richard King of the Romans, "who died in 1272 ; he was the 
brother of Henry III., and father of Edmund Earl of Cornwall, 
who succeeded him in that earldom, and died in 1300. Both 
Richard and his son were lords of the manor of Woodpery, Ox- 
fordshire, and a tile of that period, having on it an eagle dis- 
played with one head, was found on the site of the old church 
there, associated with another bearing a lion rampant, a device 
also referable to him, it having been borne gu. crowned or on a 
field arg. with a bordure sab. bezanty, both by him and his son 
as Earls of Cornwall. In Oxford cathedral were tiles of corre- 
sponding date, bearing respectively an eagle displayed with two 
heads, a lion rampant, and the arms of England; and at Dure- 
iord Abbey, Sussex, and at Warblington church, Hants, were 
an eagle displayed with two heads, and a similar two-headed 
eagle, having on its breast an escutcheon charged with a lion 
rampant, intended doubtless for the arms of Edmund Earl of 
Cornwall, who bore the above-mentioned coat, a lion rampant 
crowned within a bordure bezanty, upon an eagle displayed, as 
appears by his seal engraved by Sandford, to show his descent 
from a King of the Romans. The omission of the crown and 
bordure is by no means conclusive against the arms on this tile 
having been intended for his ; since in heraldry on tiles such 
omissions are not unfrequent, especially when, as in this case, 
the whole design is on a single tile about five inches square. 
Richard, though crowned at Aix-la-Chapelle, was never Emperor, 
for, as wrote Martinus Polonus, in the thirteenth century, of Con- 
rad 1., " inter imperatores non numerator, quia non imperavit 
in Italia;" but as both these eagles were known in England 
about 1300, and regarded as devices having some relation to the 
kingdom or empire of Germany, and the appropriation of that 
with two heads to the Emperor, and that with one only to the 
King of the Romans, had certainly not become general even in 
Germany, it is not surprising that sometimes one and some- 
times the other should have been used here for the eagle of 
the King of the Romans by the manufacturers of tiles, whose 
heraldry was never very exact. There have also been discovered 
in distant parts of the country certain weights, externally of 


brass, marked with a double-headed eagle, and either the arms 
of England without the quartering of France, or a lion rampant. 1 
These have been referred, and apparently with considerable 
reason, to the time of Henry III., and the eagle attributed to 
Richard King of the Romans. 

So much has been written on the origin and antiquity of the 
two-headed or double eagle, especially in Germany, that our 
limits will not admit of our even referring to the principal pub- 
lications in which the subject is discussed. 2 But we have not 
found it noticed that some of the earliest, if not the earliest, 
well-authenticated examples of such an eagle are on Saracenic 
coins, viz., a coin of Emad-ed-din Zengi, a ruler of Aleppo, a.d. 
1184-5 ; a coin of Es-salah Mahmud, Ortokite prince of Caifa, 
a.d. 1216-7 ; and another coin of the same prince as ruler of 
Amid, a.d. 1218. The dates are given on the coins themselves 
in the years of the Hegira. These numismatic evidences are in 
the British Museum, and for the reference to them we are in- 
debted to Mr. W. S. W. Vaux. An instance of a two-headed 
eagle is said to have been found on the shield of a soldier among 
the sculptures upon the column of Antoninus, but it rests on 
authority that requires confirmation. It is not to be supposed 
such a solitary and almost unobserved example should have led 
to the adoption of a like form of eagle by the Emperor of Ger- 
many. Those coins seem to render it not improbable that the 
form was derived from the East in one of the Crusades ; but the 
subject is involved in a mystery which does not seem likely to 
be ever dispelled. 

Note. — At the beginning of the preceding Memoir the heraldry in the other 
windows of the nave was mentioned as justifying a confident opinion, that 
the window above described is the earliest of those which are heraldic in that 
part of the cathedral. It may not, therefore, be considered irrelevant to our 
subject, or without interest to our readers, if we subjoin a brief notice of the 
arms and heraldic devices in early glazing that remain in all the windows of 
the aisles and clearstory of the nave. Some of the heraldry was found difficult 
to be made out from below, even with a telescope; of this a close inspection 
alone would have enabled us to speak positively. Drake has a plate (opposite 
p. 535), probably from some herald's notes, that purports to give all the arms 
which in 1641 were remaining in these and the other windows of the cathedral, 
but does not state the particular windows in which they were found. While 

1 See Archseologia, vol. xxv. pl.lxiv. ; Empire, and the distinction between the 

Archreol. Journal, vol. ii. p. 203. Empire and the kingdom of Germany, 

- One of the most curious is Oetter's which in his opinion led to the union of 

"Wappenbelustigung, Augsburg, 1761, 1. two eagles, are very fully investigated, 

stuck, in which the origin and history and the opinions of numerous writers 

of the double-headed eagle, or, as he on these subjects are quoted and dis- 

would have it, the double eagle of the cussed. 


several seem to have disappeared, others are unaccountably omitted; a few 
perhaps may be incorrectly engraved. For the convenience of reference, we 
will take the windows in order from east to west. 

Of the windows in the north aisle, which are all of three lights each, the first 
has been fully described above. The second has no heraldry. ■ The third has 
the middle light bordered alternately with three lions of England on a red 
ground, and semy of yellow fleurs-de-lys on a blue ground, for England and 
France; and in the tracery, at two places, is a yellow castle on a red ground, 
for Castile. The fourth has each of the two side lights bordered alternately 
with a white lion rampant on a red ground, for Mowbray, and three red chev- 
ronels on a yellow ground, for Clare ; the middle light is bordered alternately 
with three lions of England on a red ground, and three yellow crowns on a blue 
ground, probably for St. Edmund. The fifth has no heraldry. The sixth has 
the middle light bordered with yellow fleurs-de-lys on a ground per pale red 
and blue ; and on a shield in each of the side lights at the top is gu. two swords 
in saltire, the hilts upwards, for St. Paul ; the tracery has in two places a yellow 
fleur-de-lys on a red ground. The seventh has no painted glass. 

Of the windows in the south aisle, which all consist also of three lights each, 
the first has each of the two side lights bordered alternately with yellow covered 
cups on a green ground, and white castles on a red ground, probably for Galicia 
and Castile ; in the east side light at the top is a shield with England a label 
arg., Thomas of Brotherton, a younger son of Edward I., born in 1300 ; in the 
middle light at the top another shield with vert, a cross gu., which is false 
heraldry, probably due to a repair with old glass, having been originally St. 
George ; in the west side light at the top another shield with gu. three lions 
passant guardant in pale arg., no doubt for England, the lions arg. being pro- 
bably due to an omission of the yellow stain, or to a repair ; unless the coat 
were for Giffard, whose lions were not guardant. The second has no heraldry. 
The third has four shields of arms, viz., at the top of the middle light England 
a border arg., Edmund of W T oodstock, another son of Edward I., born in 1301, 
and at the bottom az. a leopard rampant guardant between several fleurs-de- 
lys arg., Holland ; in the middle of the east side light barry of 8 gu. and or, 
an old coat, but too small for the place, and no doubt an insertion (Drake gives 
from the chapter-house barry of 8, or and gu., which he attributes to FitzAlan) ; 
and in the middle of the west side light England within a border az.; as no 
such coat is known, we presume the border is a repair with old glass (Drake 
gives such a coat as existing in 1641). The fourth has five shields of arms, 
viz., in the middle light at the top England ; in the east side light at the top 
quarterly 1 and 4 gu. a castle or, and 2 and 3 (clearly a later insertion) az. 
a dolphin embowed arg., no doubt originally Castile and Leon, and in the 
middle of the same light az. semy of sprigs (leaded in) arg. a maunch gu. 
(Drake gives a coat voir, a maunch gu., which is Mauley), and below is a modern 
coat ; in the west side light at the top France semy, and in the middle of the 
same light or a bend apparently gu. (such a coat was borne t. Edward II. by 
Sir Elys Cotel, but Drake gives, probably instead of this, or a bend sab., another 
Mauley). The fifth has in the tracery two yellow keys in saltire on a red 
ground, for St. Peter. The sixth and seventh have no heraldry ; indeed the 
latter has no painted glass. 

The west window of the north aisle and the west window of the south aisle 
have each three lights, and exactly the same heraldic devices, namely, the side 
lights are each bordered alternately with yellow castles and yellow eagles dis- 
played, separated by a ground per pale green and red, most likely for Castile 


and Gavaston; of the tracery lights two are bordered in like manner, another 
has, instead of the castles and eagles, yellow crowns, probably for St. Edmund, 
and another has a lion of England on a red ground. The great west window 
of the nave, which is of eight lights, has one of the middle lights bordered with 
yellow crowns, the other with lions of England. The contract for glazing this 
window was in 133S. 

The clearstory windows are eight on each side, and have five lights each . 
The heraldry in them consists exclusively of shields of arms. For convenience 
of reference these windows will be taken also in their order from east to west, 
and the lights numbered from the spectator's left. 

Of the windows on the north side of the clearstory the first has 1. possibly 
sab. a lion rampant arg., Verdon, but the field is obscure ; 2. England ; 3. 
blank ; 4. Warenne ; 5. az. three chevronels braced or a chief gu,., FitzIIugh. 
The second has 1. Valence; 2. England; 3. blank; 4. or a cross, probably 
sab., Vescy ; 5. arg. a canton gu., an old coat of Clare, which became part of the 
label of Lionel Duke of Clarence a few years later. The third has 1. England 
within a bordure of France, John of Eltham, son of Edward II., born 1315 and 
died 1336 ; 2. gu. a lion rampant arg., Mowbray ; 3. England ; 4. gu. a cross 
moline erm., Beke, Bishop of Durham (Drake ascribes it to Paganel) ; 5. blank. 
The fourth has 1. per cross gu. and vair a bend or, Constable ; 2. England ; 3. 
blank ; 4. gu., three water-bougets arg., Ros ; 5. or a fess between two chev- 
ronels gu., Fitz Walter. The fifth has 1. blank; 2. Warenne; 3. England; 
4 and 5. blank. The sixth has 1. per cross or and gu.. on a bend sab. three 
escallops arg., Eure (Sir John was Sheriff of Yorkshire 1309, 1310) ; 2. az. a 
chief indented or, Saunders or FitzRanulph ; 3. England ; 4. gu. a saltire arg., 
Neville ; 5. gu. a lion rampant or, FitzAlan (we observe no billets, but Drake 
gives the field gu. billety or, and attributes the coat to Brdrner). The seventh 
has 1. blank; 2. gu. three escallops arg., Dacre; 3. England; 4 and 5. broken. 
The eighth has no painted glass. 

Of the windows on the south side of the clearstory the first has 1. arg. a 
maunch sab., Hastings (Sir Ralph was Governor of York Castle in 1337, and 
Sheriff of Yorkshire in 1337-8); 2. or a fess dancetty sab., Vavasour; 3. arg. 
six bars (or three bars gemelles) gu. on a canton sab. a cross patonce or, Etton ; 
4. az. three crowns or, St. Edmund ; 5. or a cross patonce sab., a modern copy 
of an old coat, Sampson (Sir John was Mayor of York 1299 and 1300). The 
second has 1. or a fess dancetty sab. (modern), Vavasour ; 2. Clare ; 3. or a lion 
rampant az., Percy ; 4. England (modern) ; 5. or a bend sab., Sir Peter Mauley. 
The third has 1. or a bend sab. as last mentioned ; 2. England ; 3. or on a bend 
sab. three dolphins arg., Sir John Mauley ; 4. or on a bend sab. three eagles 
displayed arg., Sir Robert Mauley ; 5. modern coat. The fourth has 1, 2, 3, 
and 4 too mutilated to be made out ; 5. England : it seems probable from 
Drake's plate that in this window were the arms of Gavaston. The fifth has 

1. chequy or and az. a fess gu., Clifford ; 2. apparently or a fess gu. between six 
torteaux (but possibly the coat given by Drake as or two bars gu. in chief three 
torteaux, Wake); 3. England ; 4 as 2 (unless it be the coat given by Drake 
as or a fess gu. in chief three torteaux, Colville) ; 5. broken. The sixth has 1. 
az. a cross patonce or, Warde (Sir Simon was Sheriff of Yorkshire 1316-21 ; but 
possibly the coat Avhich is given by Drake as sab. a cross patonce or, Lascells) ; 

2. arg. a bend between six martlets gu., Furnival (possibly the same which 
Drake has given as arg. a bend sab. between six martlets of the last, Tempest) ; 

3. England; 4. broken; 5. apparently per fess or and gu., in chief two fleurs-de- 
lys, and in base two or more counterchanged (but this probably is the same 


which is given hy Drake as or on a fess between three fleurs-de-lys gu. two 
others of the field, Deyville). The seventh has 1. az. a fess between three 
fleurs-de-lys or, Hoke (Sir William was Sheriff of Yorkshire 1305-7); 2. a 
modern coat ; 3. England ; 4. az. three crescents or, Eyther ; 5. broken. The 
eighth has no painted glass. In one of these windows on the south side of the 
clearstory, but we cannot now say which, is the following coat much mutilated : 
or on a fess between two chevronels gu. three mullets arg., Sir Walter Tyes, 
who died s. p. in 1324. 

We have blazoned the preceding coats as they appeared by the aid of a tele- 
scope. It will be observed that in several instances they differ from those given 
by Drake which there is reason to think were intended for the same. The 
variances may perhaps be accounted for sometimes by repairs with old glass 
since 1641, and sometimes by a difference of opinion as to the colour of the 
glass, which in many places appears very dirty. In two cases he has given sab. 
where we have noted gu. ; which may be due to the charges having been of red 
glass covered with enamel brown to make it opaque, and the enamel having 
partially come off so as to make the glass now appear a dirty red. The instance 
in which he has given the field sab. where we have it az. may perhaps be due 
to a similar cause. These, however, are questions which a close and careful 
examination of the glass could alone satisfactorily determine. 

We must not leave this subject without mentioning that some of the glass 
in the tracery of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th windows on the north 
side of the clearstory, and in four of those on the south side, is very old, pro- 
bably of the twelfth century ; a portion of it is engraved in Browne's ' York 
Cathedral,' pi. exxiii. It may have formed part of the glazing of the window's 
of the nave which existed previously to the erection of the present. 

Supplementary Note from the ' Archaeological Journal,' vol. xx. p. 330 : — 
" In the window called the ' Bell-founder's window,' the next window to the 
one described [in the preceding memoir], is the representation, in the lower part 
of the central light, of a figure in civil dress, kneeling before an archbishop who 
is nimbed and seated on a throne. Over the head of the kneeling figure is a 
scroll inscribed ' Richard Tunnoc ;' and at the bottom of the window are the 
remains of an inscription, very much mutilated, in which the following words 
are legible : ' Richard . . . noc me fist . . .' I have been informed by my 
friend Rev. J. Raine, the biographer of the Archbishops of York, that in 1320 
Richard Tunnoc was one of the sheriffs of York, and that there was a chaDtry 
in the Minster, at the altar of St. Thomas of Canterbury, founded for the repose 
of the soul of Richard Tunnoc, citizen of York." 



(From the Archaeological Journal, vol. xx. 186.3.) 

F it were possible for any one to suppose that Gothic 
architecture was indigenous to these northern 
regions, a glance at the windows of the earlier 
buildings in the style might suffice to undeceive 
him. The smallness and fewness of the openings, 
and deep colours of the glazing, are alike sugges- 
tive of a climate where a blazing sun exacts this 
homage to his power. The instinctive desire, under 
an obscure sky, for light, is exemplified by the increased size 
given to the windows as the architecture gradually became accli- 
matised, and by the diminution of their colouring. And after 
Gothic architecture, in its turn, was superseded by another 
exotic style better suited to modern wants, a happy appreciation 
of the popular love of light characterises the works of the 
greatest of our national architects, Sir Christopher Wren. 

It is interesting to follow the progress of these changes, and 
observe their relation to each other, in the mediaeval styles of 
architecture and glass-painting. 1 In the Norman style, and in 
the earlier part of the Early English, whenever the use of much 
white glass occurs, it should be regarded as a submission to dire 
necessity. But the employment of white glass in large quantity, 
as a matter of choice, is observable in the latter part of the 

1 According to Hickman's nomencla- 
ture, which seems as intelligible as any 
that has since been invented, the Early 
English style of architecture, which suc- 
ceeded the Norman towards the last 
quarter of the twelfth century, was in 
its turn succeeded by the Decorated in 
the last quarter of the thirteenth, and 
this again by the Perpendicular in the 
last quarter of the fourteenth. 

There is no style in painted glass 

coeval with the Norman in architecture, 
the glass found in Norman buildings 
really belonging to the Early English 
style of glass-painting, which was suc- 
ceeded by the Decorated about 1280, 
and that by the Perpendicular about 
li80. The Cinqueceuto style in glass- 
painting, which was concurrent for a 
while with the Perpendicular in archi- 
tecture, commenced about 1500, and 
ended in 1550. 


Early English period ; and it continued throughout the Decorated, 
in an increasing ratio to the coloured. With the Perpendicular 
style — the style of architecture which we in England associate 
with the idea of "walls of glass" — occurred a remarkable change 
in the glass manufacture. The coloured glass was made less 
deep, and generally speaking more even in tint, alterations 
absolutely necessary to suit it to the more finished mode of 
painting then adopted, and which culminated in the cinque- 
cento ; and white glass, whiter than before, was used in in- 
creasing profusion. The result is of course to occasion the 
transmission of a greater amount of light through the glazing. 
These changes were accompanied, at particular epochs, with 
remarkable alterations in the details of the design ; peculiarities 
on which the antiquary mainly relies as affording indications of 
date, and which are nearly, but not strictly, synchronous with 
changes in the corresponding details of the architecture — the 
change in the architectural detail usually preceding by a few 
years that in the painted glass. 

A remarkable illustration of this fact is afforded by the great 
east window of Gloucester cathedral, and its glazing. The 
stone framework of the window is an early but decided example 
of the Perpendicular style, and the painted glass is a pure 
example of the Decorated. So pure is it indeed, that, but for the 
incontrovertible evidence of date afforded by the heraldry in the 
window, we should hesitate to proclaim it to be one of the latest 
instances of the Decorated style of glass-painting. It presents 
no feature really indicative of the great change of style which 
was then imminent. Its material, 1 its mode of execution, the 
use of " smear-shading," 2 the forms of the hunan features, 
especially of the eye and nose, all are such as any well-pro- 
nounced specimen of the style exhibits. The general design, 
too, of the glass-painting, though in some respects novel, is in 
strict accordance with the rules of the Decorated style, and has 
no resemblance to a Perpendicular example, except in the very 
large proportion which the white glass in it bears to the coloured. 

The design of the glass-painting will be more readily com- 

1 The red used is the "streaked" and "stippled" shading is explained in 
sort, which ceased to be manufactured the ' Inquiry into the Difference of Style 
soon after the middle of the fourteenth observable in Ancient Glass Paintings, 
century. The peculiarity of its appear- by an Amateur,' vol. i. pp. 16, 125, 
ance is owing to the mode in which the The one is characteristic of the Deco- 
metallic copper, its principal colouring rated, the other of the Perpendicular 
material, is precipitated in the process. style. See also Archaeological Journal, 

2 The difference between "smear" ix. p. 47, and ante, p. 80. 


prehencled by a reference to that of the stonework, which is 
shown by the accompanying diagram (fig. 1). 

It will be seen that there are towards the top of the central 
portion of the window two tiers of lower lights more than in 
the wings of the window. The space left blank in the diagram, 
towards the bottom of the window, is occupied partly with solid 
stonework, partly with lights open to the Lady Chapel, and 
which never have been glazed. 1 

The remains of the original glass plainly show that the tiers 
of lights in the wings of the window, marked bb, bb, were 
filled with patternwork principally of white glass, the lights 
being glazed with white quarries, each ornamented with a star, 
and having a narrow edging on its two upper sides so arranged 
as to form, when the quarries are placed together, a reticulated 
pattern ; and being bordered with an ornamental pattern of 
white and yellow foliage and flowers on a red ground. These 
borders are cut through by the arched tracery bars shown in the 
diagram. At present they pass into the spandrels of the lights 
in the tiers A A, A A. It is more probable that these spandrels 
were originally filled with ornamented quarries, like the spandrels 
of the tiers bb,bb, c c, and the pierced transom which separates 
these tiers. The lights in the tiers a a, a a, retain none of their 
original glazing. It is most likely that they were treated in the 
same way as the lights of the tiers bb, bb. 

The lights of the tier c c were quarried and bordered precisely 
in the same way as the lights in the tiers bb, b b. And they 
were enriched by the insertion, in the upper part of the light, of 
an ornamented panel containing a shield of arms, and, in the 
lower part, of a small ornamented roundel. The original panels 
remain in all the wing lights : in the centre lights they have 
been destroyed, and in four of these lights a second row of 
shields has been inserted at a late period. The loss of some 
of the original shields from the centre of the tier is also to 
be regretted. 

The lights throughout the next tier, D d, are each filled with a 
canopy enshrining a single figure. The canopy base serves as a 

1 In plan this window forms a shallow second largest window in the kingdom 

bay, its centre being slightly advanced which retains its original glazing. The 

eastward, and joined with the wings at Gloucester window is about 72 ft. high 

obtuse angles. Though the Gloucester and 38 wide, and the York window, 

window is larger than the east window which is entirely glazed, about 78 ft. 

of York Minster, yet, if we consider the high and 33 wide. The contract for 

extent of the glazing, it is only the glazing the latter is dated 1405. 



FlC .3 


MZ £^ ^^ ^W^ 

n ' ^ r 



46 I ! 47 

49 510 

V ^ 

Ljl_j .... 

^ ^f^ 5^5^ 5^^ 5^^ 5^5^ T^5^ ?^?^ 

I \ S3) 1 54) \SS\\S6\ \57\ (si] f 59] (60 S [61 ] f 62 ] |63|(64| 65 [66| 



^^ ^r^ 

Diagram illustrative ok the East Window of Gloucester Cathedral. 


pedestal to the figure, and occupies the entire width of the light ; 
a fact worthy of observation on account of the proof it affords 
that the series of shrinework in the window, the position of 
which is indicated by the shading in the diagram, was intended 
to commence in this tier of lights, and not in any lower tier. 
The canopy is of simple design, consisting of side jambs which 
support a flat-fronted arched hood, surmounted with a tall 
crocketed pediment terminating within the light in a finial. On 
each side of the pediment is represented, in very strange per- 
spective, the side of a part of a high-pitched roof which may be 
supposed to run parallel with the front of the window, and to 
cover the niches of all the canopies in this tier. The side jambs 
do not terminate in this tier of lights, but proceed upwards, 
without further interruption than that occasioned by their being 
cut through by the stone framework, behind which they appear 
to pass, into the lights of the next tier; through which they 
again proceed, and so on, until those in the wing lights terminate 
in finials in the tiers f f, f f, and those in the centre lights in 
the tier h h. The side jambs support, in each of the lights of 
the tier e e, a flat-fronted arched canopy hood, surmounted with 
a high crocketed pediment, which terminates in a finial in the 
centre light of the pierced transom above ; and in each of the 
lights of the tier f f, f f, a flat-fronted arched canopy hood 
surmounted with a high crocketed pediment, behind which rises 
a lofty crocketed spire, terminating within the light in a finial. 
In like manner, in each of the lights of the central tier G G, is 
supported a canopy hood, the spires and pinnacles of which 
ascend into the lights of the tier H H, which they occupy, and 
where they terminate. 

As before mentioned, each canopy, pediment, and spire ter- 
minates in a finial. But from behind each of the pediments in 
the tiers dd,ee, and of the spires in the central tier f f, there 
issues a shaft, which proceeds upwards into the light immediately 
above, where it finishes in a bracket, having no connexion with 
the canopy jambs, and which serves as a pedestal for the figure 
in that light. Thus the figures in the tier e e stand upon 
brackets ultimately supported by the; pediments in the tier d d ; 
those in the tier ff, f f, upon brackets virtually sustained by 
the pediments in the tier e e ; and those in the tier G G upon 
brackets supported in like manner by the spires in the centre 
tier f f. But the spires in the wing tiers f f and f f, and in 
the centre tier h h, are not surmounted with any shafts ; which 
shows clearly that the termination of the shrinework in these 



tiers of lights is original. In corroboration of this I may add 
that the heads of the lights in the wing tiers f F and f f, and in 
the centre tier h h, are, alone of the lights containing the shrine- 
work, each bordered with a narrow strip of plain white glass. 

The shrinework is entirely, and the figures are almost entirely, 
composed of white glass, enriched with the yellow stain. It, as 
well as the figures, is backed with red and blue glass in alternate 
vertical stripes. The colours of the stripes are denoted in the 
diagram by the direction of the diagonal lines of the shading. 
The shading from left to right indicates red, — that from right 
to left, blue. 

It will be perceived that the centre stripe occupies the space 
of two lights, and is red, and that the other stripes are of the 
width of one light apiece, and alternately blue and red. The 
general effect of the window is that of a series of white canopies 
and figures upon a coloured ground. The continuation of the 
same colour perpendicularly alike through the spire-grounds and 
niches of the canopies, imparts breadth to the design, whilst 
monotony is prevented by the alternation of the red and blue 
stripes ; and great point and prominence are given to the centre 
of the design by the double width of the middle stripe, and its 
red colour. 

The remains of the glazing of the tracery lights show that 
this portion of the composition was formed of a pattern of white 
glass, enriched with a few coloured ornaments. The small holes 
in the tracery are filled with plain pieces of white glass, and the 
other lights are bordered with plain strips of the same material, 
and filled with white quarries ornamented like those in the lower 
part of the window. The topmost light, No. 1, is now occupied 
with the figure of a pope, 1 and canopy, both of the fifteenth 
century. In all probability this light was originally filled with 
ornamented quarries, and it is not unlikely that it was enriched 
as the lights Nos. 2, 2, are, with a large five-pointed flaming 
star of yellow pot-metal glass, or some similar ornament. The 
lights Nos. 3, 8, 3, 3, are each adorned with a small ornamental 
roundel in white and yellow stained glass. 

Thus the general design of the window may be divided into 
three parts. The lower part, and top, consisting of a silvery 
expanse of white ornamental work ; and the middle, of a grand 
series of shrinework, rendered the more imposing by its towering 
centre and bold horizontal summit. Though richly coloured, 

1 The figure wears a triple-crowned tiara, and holds a double cross. I suspect 
it was brought from the Lady Chapel. 


especially towards the top, this part of the composition contains 
so much white as to prevent its forming too decided a contrast 
with the rest of the window. The disproportion between the 
white ornamented space below, and that above the shrinework, 
which appears in the diagram, is in reality not felt, on account of 
the partial obscuration of the lower part of the window by the 
mass of the Lady Chapel ; and which, by varying the colours, 
greatly increases the beauty and effect of the design. The Lady 
Chapel that existed when the window was put up, though 
smaller than the present, was large enough to have produced 
a somewhat similar effect ; a circumstance which may have 
determined the designers of the glass shrinework not to carry it 
lower than the fourth tier of lights from the bottom. 

As a doubt of the originality of the present arrangement has, 
however, been expressed, it is hoped that the following con- 
siderations may assist in dispelling it. 

The principle of filling the middle part of a window with 
shrinework highly enriched with colour, and the upper and 
lower parts with little else than white patternwork, was too 
commonly adopted throughout the Decorated period to render 
it necessary to quote instances of the practice. And though 
the elevating of the centre of the shrinework above its flanks, 
as in this example, is as unique in this country as it is striking 
and beautiful in effect, it should be recollected that similar 
arrangements may be observed in Continental designs con- 
temporaneous, or nearly so, with it. Again, the general arrange- 
ment of the upper part of the design of the east window 
harmonizes with that of the clearstory windows of the choir. 
These windows, five in number on each side, at present retain 
sufficient fragments of their original glazing to indicate its 
design. Each of these windows is divided by stonework into 
two tiers of lower lights and a head of tracery. The four lights 
of the lower tier each contained a. figure x and canopy, coloured 

1 No part of these figures remains, f f, f f of that window, being, however, 

which prevents the fact of any removals somewhat shorter than the latter ; they 

thence into the east window (however are also about 3 in. wider than the 

probable) being tested by admeasure- widest lights of the east window, i.e. 

ment. Parts of no less than six figures, the six central lights. They, therefore, 

coeval with the glass in the clearstory, may be conceived to have originally 

may be seen, as insertions in the lower contained figures somewhat larger than 

part of the east window of the Lady those in any part of the east window. 

Chapel. The lights of the lowest tier The corresponding lights in the fifth 

in the four windows on each side of clearstory window on each side are of 

the clearstory next the east window, the same width as the central lights of 

range nearly with the lights of the tier the east window. 



probably like those in the east window, but the rest of the 
window was filled with pattern work, composed almost entirely of 
white glass ; each light of the upper tier being glazed with 
white ornamented quarries, and enriched with two ornamental 
roundels of white and yellow stained glass, or with two small 
coloured panels of ornament. It is true that these lights were 
furnished with borders, like those in the lower tiers of the east 
window, C C, &c, on a red ground ; but the greater size of these 
lights, compared with any of those in the tracery of the east 
window, rendered this slight addition of colour necessary to 
prevent poverty of effect. The tracery lights of the clearstory 
windows were, like the tracery lights of the east, bordered only 
with plain strips of white glass, and filled with ornamented 
quarries, and a small roundel of white and yellow stained glass 
was inserted in each of the two principal tracery lights of each 

Moreover, all the little pieces of plain white glass which, as 
before mentioned, fill the triangular and other small openings in 
the tracery of the east window, were, until the recent re- 
building of the stonework, undoubtedly in situ : a circumstance 
of itself sufficient to prove that the upper part of the window 
always had a white ground. The glazing also of such of the 
tracery lights as were coeval with the stonework had been formed 
exactly to fit the openings, and the glass had always been cut 
with the grozing iron, and not with the diamond, and was 
universally retained in leadwork of the same age as the glass. 

These facts cannot reasonably be reconciled with the theory 
that the glazing of the tracery lights has been transferred from 
the lights at the bottom of the east window, which, as before 
remarked, have lost their original glass, or indeed from else- 

Features occur in the east window which certainly evince a 
desire to avoid unnecessary expense ; but this, as it seems to me, 
proves only that our mediaeval ancestors were wiser men than 
modern enthusiasts imagine them to have been. I allude princi- 
pally to the simplification of the glazier's Avork in the heads of 
the lower lights. This has been effected by making the outside 
of the stone framework plainer than the inside, and fitting the 
glass to the plainer openings. Fig. 2 represents an exterior 
view of a column of lights, showing how much of the orna- 
mentation that is visible from the inside is hidden by the glass 
from a spectator on the outside of the building. The painted 
glass borders in the foliated heads of the lights in the tiers A a, 


A A, B B, B b, c c, do not conform to the cuspidations, but each 
follows the course of the plain ogee panel, into which the glazing- 
is fitted : so that the border, when seen from within, appears to 
be cut and partially hidden by the cuspidations which are before 
it. Again, instead of the openings in the transom, which is 
immediately above the lights of the tier e e, being glazed 
separately, the topmost glazing panel of the light beneath is 
prolonged upwards, and fitted into the square-headed panel 
shown in fig. 2. Plain white glass is indeed used to cover those 
portions of the stonework which are overlaid by the glazing 
panel, as shown in fig. 3, where the shaded part represents the 
painted glass, and the plain part the white. But if the intention 
was not merely to economise the colouring material, but also to 
allow of the stonework being seen from the outside, the latter 
object has been frustrated by the strong local colour of the white 
glass, which effectually conceals the stonework. The same 
principle of forming a window-frame more ornamented on the 
inside of the glass-line than without is partly adopted in the 
great west window ; and I should not have alluded to the 
circumstance, if it, and a certain awkward finishing of the shrine- 
work in the wing lights of the tier f f, f f, had not been 
adduced to prove that the original design of the window was not 
fully carried out as intended. 

The figures in the window have suffered severely, especially 
those in the lights of the south wing. Scarcely one remains 
entire ; portions more or less important of the original glazing 
having been lost, and supplied by glass of various elates, several 
are reduced to little else than a mere cong-eries of fragments. 
Seven figures, and parts of three others, may I think be pro- 
nounced to be insertions, and presumed, with the exception of 
one figure which is of later date, to have been taken from the 
clearstory windows of the choir. 

Enough, however, remains to indicate the nature of the 
original design. Its leading subject was, the enthronement 
of the Blessed Virgin. The principal group is placed in the 
two central lights of the tier ff, f f, and was attended by twelve 
apostles. The tier above, G G, was occupied with angels ; the 
tier e E, with various saints ; and the tier d d, with figures of 
ecclesiastics, intermixed, perhaps, with those of one or two kings. 1 

1 Some curious arrangements of apos- Art,' vol. i. p. 1-47. The following has 

ties and saints, illustrative of the been supplied by the kindness of a 

feelings of the times, are given in Mrs. friend. 
Jameson's work, ' Sacred and Legendary From S. Lorenzo fuori il Muro — 


Of the angels, five remain in situ, as is indicated by their 
attitudes, and the contrasting, in each case, of the colour of the 
nimbus with the ground of the canopy niche. The figures are 
arranged in pairs, looking or turned towards one another. Thus, 
Nos. 5, 7, and 9 regard the south, and Nos. 8 and 10 (No. 6 is 
a late insertion) the north. 

The figure of the Virgin is placed in the light No. 17. It is 
crowned, enthroned, and regards the figure of our Lord, which 
occupies the adjoining light, No. 18. There is reason to believe 
that this figure also, which now appears to be standing, was 
enthroned. Of the apostles, St. Peter stands in the first place 
of honour, No. 16 ; and St. Paul in the next, No. 19. Both are 
turned towards the principal group. The two next figures, 
St. John the Evangelist in No. 15, and St. Thomas in No. 20, 
are turned from it, evidently for the sake of artistic effect. In 
No. 14 St. Andrew is recognised by his cross, and in No. 12 
St. James the Less by his club. Two other sainted personages, 
similar in appearance to the rest, but without attributes, occupy 
Nos. 11 and 13. These four figures are all turned towards the 
principal group, and therefore regard the south. So far as we 
have gone, all the figures in this tier may be considered to be 
in situ. On the opposite side of the window, the feet only, and 
part of the draperies, of two apostolic figures remain in the 
lights Nos. 23 and 24, and in attitudes showing that the figures 
to which they belonged must have been turned towards the 
north. The figures of kings in the lights Nos. 21 and 22, and 
in the upper parts of the lights Nos. 23 and 24, are certainly 
not in situ, nor do they appear to have belonged to this 

The figures in the two next tiers, E E and d d, were originally 
arranged in the same way as the angels in the tier G G, in pairs, 
looking or turned towards one another. I believe that all those 

Pelagius, St. Lawrence, a Saint, Christ, Old Tribune, near the Lateran — St. 

St. Paul, St. Stephen, a Saint, query Luke, St. Paul, Christ, St. Peter, St. 

St. George ? All but the first are Andrew. 

nimbed. Below — St. Barnabas, St. Thaddeus, 

From the Lateran— St. Paul, St. Peter, St. James, St. Matthew, St. Philip, St. 

Virgin Mary, Christ, St. John Baptist, John, St. James, St. Bartholomew, 

St. John Evangelist, St. Andrew. St. Thomas, St. Simon, St. Matthias, 

Below in the same composition — St. St. Mark. 

Jude, St. Simon, St. James (an ink- In Sta. Maria Trastevere— Innocent, 

horn), St. Thomas, St. James (a book), Lawrence, Calixtus, the Virgin, Christ, 

St. Philip, St. Bartholomew, St. Mat- St. Peter, Cornelius, and some other 

thew, St. Matthias, All these axe legendary saints, 


which occupy the lights Nos. 23 to 36 inclusive are in situ, 
Amongst them may be recognised St. Cecily, in No. 25 ; St. 
Greorge, in No. 26 ; St. Canute (?), in No. 28 ; St. Margaret, in 
No. 29 ; St. Lawrence, in No. 30 ; and St. John Baptist, in 
No. 32. Of these figures, Nos. 25, 27, &c, regard the south, 
and the alternate ones the north. Subjected to the test afforded 
by attitude, the figure in No. 37, which is turned towards the 
north, is certainly not in situ; and from the large size of the 
heads, and other circumstances, I think that both this and 
the next figure, No. 38, are insertions. 

In the tier d d there is reason to believe that all the figures 
are in situ, except those of kings in Nos. 46, 47, and 48. 

Subjected to the test of attitude, the figure No. 46 is certainly 
not in situ ; and its large size militates against its being con- 
sidered an original one. The same remark applies to the figure 
No. 47, as also to the upper part of the figure in No. 48, and 
with the greater force, since in the lower part of this light may 
be perceived the remains of an ecclesiastical figure, turned, 
according to its right order, northwards. We have, therefore, 
in the wing lights of this tier, proceeding in the same order 
from the centre, a series of ecclesiastics, mitred, or bareheaded, 
but all fully vested, and holding pastoral staves, or crooks ; the 
mitred individuals occupying the lights Nos. 42, 40, 49, and 
51 ; and the bareheaded, the alternate lights in the wings, and 
Nos. 43 and 44 in the centre. It is impossible now to ascertain 
to which class the remains of the figure at the bottom of the 
light No. 48 belonged ; nor is it quite certain to which No. 44 
originally belonged, the glazing round the indent of the head of 
this figure not being trustworthy. But if No. 46 originally was 
occupied with the figure of a king, and if the royal personage 
represented in No. 45 is really in situ, we might, perhaps, con- 
clude that the unity of the design was preserved by the figures 
of two bareheaded ecclesiastics, occupying the lights Nos. 47 
and 48. 

I have hazarded no conjectural identifications of such figures 
as are undistinguished by symbols, distinctive habiliments, or 
other attributes, and which, apparently, having been drawn 
from one common model, exhibit but little individuality. Those 
who are inclined to pursue the subject further will find a fuller 
description of the figures in the following catalogue, as well as 
the reasons upon which this brief criticism has been principally 
based : — 


o. An angel with a blue nimbus holding a palm-branch, and turned towards 
he south. The wing is coloured in bars, the upper one being white, the 
centre blue, and the end yellow. The hair of the head is stained yellow. 1 

6. A little of the original canopy-work remains, but the rest of the glazing 
belongs to the fifteenth century, and represents the Virgin and the Holy 
Infant. The borders of the draperies have been ornamented with coloured 
pieces of glass stuck on in the way recommended by the Monk Theophilus, 2 
but these additions have fallen off. The crown on the Virgin's head might at 
first be mistaken for one of classical character ; its form is, however, due to the 
ingenuity of some glazier in modern times, who has substitued points for the 
original leaves round the circlet. 

7. The remains of an angel, similar to No. 5 ; having a blue nimbus, and 
turned towards the south. The figure has suffered much. The head is of the 
fifteenth century. 

8. An angel, like No. 5, having a blue nimbus, and turned towards the 

9. An angel, like No. 5, having a red nimbus, and turned towards the 
south. The head and upper part of this figure are of the fifteenth century. 

10. An angel, like No. 5, having a blue nimbus, and turned towards the 

11. A male figure, having a blue nimbus, holding a book in the left hand, 
and turned towards the south. 

12. A male figure, having a red nimbus, and holding a club, the handle of 
which is of yellow stained glass, and the end of blue glass. The figure is 
turned towards the south, but the eyes regard the north. — St. James the 

13. A male figure, having a blue nimbus, holding a book, and turned 
towards the south. This figure is much mutilated. 

14. A male figure, having a red nimbus, and pointing with the left hand to 
an X cross, coloured green. The figure is turned towards the south, but the 
eyes regard the north. — St. Andrew. 

15. A male figure, with a blue nimbus, holding a palm-branch in his left 
hand, and with an eagle perched on his right, looking into his face. This 
figure is turned, and looks towards the north. — St. John the Evangelist. 

16. A male figure, having a light blue nimbus (the colour of the niche is 
deep blue diapered), 3 and holding two keys in his right, and a model of a 
church in his left hand. The figure is turned towards the south. — St. Peter. 

17. A female figure, crowned, and having a blue nimbus, seated, and looking 
towards the figure in No. 18. Though seated, it is as tall as the other figures 
which stand erect. — The Virgin Mary. 

1 When no colour is expressed, white 3 The ground of this entire column of 
glass is to be understood. lights, viz., 16, 30, 44, is blue diaper, 

2 See the translation of ch. xxviii. as was that of the column containing 
of the 'Diversarutn Artium Schedula. Nos. 19, 33, 47. The ground of the 
of Theophilus, given in the ' Inquiry spires of the canopy of No. 47 is dia- 
into the Difference of Style observable pered, but the ground of the niche is 
in Ancient Glass-paintings, by an Ama- not, a corroboration of the opinion 
teur,' vol.i. p. 337, and note (k), p. '28, elsewhere expressed, that the figure in 
ibid. The work of Theophilus is said this light does not belong to this 
to have been written about 1220; see window. 

Arch. Journ. vol. xix. p. 347. 


18. A male figure, crowned, and having a gi-een nimbus, with a white cross 
in it (the niche ground is red, and, unlike the other red ground, is diapered). 
The mantle is fastened with a purple-coloured morse. The figure regards that 
in No. 17. The right hand is raised in benediction ; no stigma is shown. The 
left hand, lower part of the body, and feet, have been lost, and the ground of 
the lower half of the niche is not original. What remains of the drapery is 
not inconsistent with the belief that the figure, when perfect, was seated. This 
figure doubtless represented Our Lord. 

19. A male figure, with a light blue nimbus (the niche ground is deep blue 
diapered), holding a sword, in the right hand, and a book in the left. The 
face is lost. The figure is turned towards the north. — St. Paul. 

20. A male figure, without a nimbus, the head draped and bearded, holding 
a spear in the right hand, and a girdle in the left. The figure is turned 
towards the south. — St. Thomas the Apostle. 

21. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes, and holding a sceptre; no 
nimbus. The lower part of the body is a mere mass of fragments. It is 
turned towards the north, but, being of a larger scale than the other figures in 
this tier, I cannot suppose it to be one of the original figures of the window. 

22. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes, holding a sword in the left hand. 
The right is lost ; no nimbus. This figure is very much made up of frag- 
ments ; it is apparently of the same scale as the original figures in the tier, and 
is turned towards the north ; but 1 think it is an insertion. 

23. In this light are the remains — clearly an insertion — of the upper half of 
the body of a royal person, crowned, holding a sword in the left hand, but 
having no nimbus. The face is of the fifteenth century. The lower part of 
the body is a mass of fragments. The pedestal is lost, but its indent remains ; 
and just above it are two naked feet and some drapery, whose attitude shows 
that the figure to which they belonged — probably that of an apostle — was 
turned towards the north. There is no douht but that this fragment is part 
of an original figure. 

24. This light also contains the upper half of a male figure, crowned, in 
royal robes, holding a sceptre in the left hand, but having no nimbus, turned 
towards the south, and of the same scale as No. 21, and clearly an insertion. 
The pedestal remains, and one naked foot and some original drapery rest upon 
it. From the position of the foot and drapery, it is evident that the figure 
to which they belonged — probably that of an apostle — was turned towards the 
north. There is no doubt but that this fragment is part of an original figure. 

25. A female figure, with a blue nimbus, having a wreath of red roses on 
her head, and a book in her right hand. This figure is turned towards the 
south. It is perhaps the best drawn of the series. — St. Cecily. 

26. A male figure, turned towards the north ; in a plate skull-cap and 
hauberk of mail, over which is a white cyclas, bearing a red cross, and lined 
with green. On the hands are gauntlets of plate. The legs are in plate. The 
spurs are rowelled. The figure holds a spear in the right hand, without a 
pennon. The left hand rests on the sword-handle. A dagger is placed on the 
right side, and a shield, white, with a red cross, hangs partly over the left side 
and arm, suspended from the neck by a strap. No nimbus. 1 — St. George. 

1 We have seen that St. Thomas is in a window at Aldwinckle St. Peter's, 

also represented without a nimbus. It Northamptonshire, with the name of 

was not uncommon to omit the nimbus the saint, however, written underneath, 

from St. George. Such a figure occurs This glass is of the time of Edw. II. 


27. A female figure, having a blue nimbus, and holding a book in her right 
hand. The figure, which is much mutilated, is turned towards the south. 

28. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes, holding two arrows in the left 
hand, and turned towards the north. No nimbus. The figure stands on a 
piece of green turf overlying the pedestal. — St. Canute (?). 

29. A female figure, as may be concluded from some tresses of hair which 
lie on the shoulders. The face is lost. The figure, which has a blue nimbus, 
and is turned towards the south, is treading upon a dragon, and presses down 
a spear, which enters its mouth, and goes out at its neck. — St. Margaret. 

30. A male figure, with a red nimbus, tonsured, in mass vestments, turned 
towards the north, and holding a gridiron painted black. — St. Lawrence. 

31. A female figure, crowned, holding a sword in the right hand, and a book 
in the left, turned towards the south. No nimbus. — St. Catherine (?). 

32. A male figure, with a blue nimbus, clad in a short white drapery, 
fringed all round, and reaching to the calf of the leg. The legs and feet are 
naked. The right hand is lost, the left remains ; it did once support some 
tolerably large object (such as an agnus Dei), now lost. The figure, which is 
turned towards the north, stands on a piece of green turf overlying the pedestal. 
—St. John the Baptist (?). 

33. The head of this figure is gone, and the whole body is shattered to 
pieces. It has a red nimbus. Amongst the fragments are a left-hand glove, 
holding what may have been a pastoral staff, and a right-hand glove raised in 
benediction, as well as one foot, shoed. From the position of the hand holding 
the staff, I conclude that the figure was turned towards the south. 

34. This figure is also a mass of fragments. It has a blue nimbus. The 
head is lost. Amongst the fragments are a left hand holding a sword, and a 
right (neither is gloved) playing with the belt or girdle of the figure. From 
the position of the hands, especially of the right, I conclude that the figure was 
turned towards the north. The probability is that this and the former figure 
are original. 

35. Apparently a male figure. The head is lost; it has a red nimbus. The 
left hand is placed on the breast, the right supports a thick knotted staff or 
club, coloured green. It is turned towards the south, and appears to be an 
original figure. 

36. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes, holding a sceptre in the left 
hand, and turned towards the north. The lower half of this figure is made up 
of fragments. No nimbus. It appears to be an original figure. 

37. The head of a male figure, wearing a patriarchal hat, coloured pink, in 
the front of which has been inserted a small square piece of white glass, of the 
fifteenth century, representing a head of Christ, with part of the nimbus. The 
figure is a mere mass of fragments, and is a good deal shorter than the original 
figures of this tier. From its looking towards the north, it cannot be in situ, 
and, owing to the large scale of the head, I think it did not belong to this 
window. It has no nimbus. 

38. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes ; no nimbus. The whole, except 
a small portion of the upper part of the body, and the feet, is made up of frag- 
ments. The figure was turned towards the north, but, on account of its large 
scale, I think it is not an original figure. 

39. A male figure in mass vastments, tonsured, holding a pastoral staff in 
its left hand, and turned towards the south. None of the figures in this tier 
of lights has a nimbus. 

40. A male figure, mitred, in mass vestments, the right hand in benediction, 


the left holding a pastoral staff. The lower half of the figure is much muti- 
lated. It is turned towards the north. 

41. A male figure, in mass vestments, tonsured, holding a pastoral staff in 
the right hand, and a hook in the left. The figure is turned towards the 

42. A male figure, mitred, in mass vestments, the right hand in benediction, 
the left holding a pastoral staff. The figure is turned towards the north. 

43. A male figure ; the head is of the fifteenth century, and it is impossible 
to determine whether the original head was mitred. The figure is very much 
mutilated. The fragments show that the remains are those of a figure turned 
towards the south, supporting a pastoral staff with the right hand, and holding 
a book in the left. 

44. This figure is a mass of fragments. The head is lost. The indent is 
clearly that of a tonsured head, not mitred ; but as none of the original back- 
ground remains, it is impossible to be certain of the originality of the indent. 
Part of the collar of a cope, crossed with a staff, as of a pastoral staff, remains, 
from Avhich it appears that the figure was turned towards the north. The 
probability, therefore, is in favour of its being an original figure. The head of 
the pastoral staff, and the hand introduced as supporting it, are of the fifteenth 

45. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes, holding a sceptre in the right 
hand, and a mound surmounted with a very lofty cross in the left. Very 
little of the original drapery below the waist remains. The space from the 
feet to the knees is constructed of fragments. The figure is turned towards 
the south. It is of the same scale as the original figures of this tier, and I 
have no reason to suspect its not being one of them. 

46. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes, holding three arrows in its left 
hand, and turned towards the south. The hands, face, and hair of this figure 
are coloured pink, the hair being of a deeper tint than the countenance. As 
this figure is half a head taller than any of those in this tier, it cannot belong 
to it ; nor does its size admit of its having belonged to the window. 

47. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes; the right hand points to a 
sceptre held in the left. Part of the white robe is made of spoiled or imperfect 
ruby glass. The feet remain, but all above, to the middle of the figure, is a 
mass of fragments. The figure is turned towards the south. It is of the 
same scale as the last, and I think it does not belong to this window. 

48. The upper half of this figure is made up of fragments. The face is lost, 
but there is a crown over it, and a right hand holding a spear. The lower- 
part of the figure is that of an ecclesiastic in mass vestments, with a book in 
the right hand, and a pastoral staff in the left. The position of the hands 
shows that this figure was turned towards the north ; from which I conclude 
that it was an original figure. I should add that the scale of the remains of 
the upper figure might entitle it to be considered one of the original figures of 
the window displaced. 

49. A male figure, mitred, in mass vestments, the right hand in benediction, 
the left holding a pastoral staff. The figure is turned towards the south. It 
is much shattered. 

50. A male figure, in mass vestments, tonsured, holding a pastoral staff in 
the right hand, and a book in the left. The figure is turned towards the 
north. In the amice is inserted a piece of blue glass, round like a jewel, which 
seems original. 

51. This figure is a mere mass of fragments, amongst which may be seen a 


mitre, turned towards the south, aud a right hand, gloved, holding a staff, 
prohably a pastoral staff. I believe that this, as well as the last, are the 
remains of original figures. 

52. This figure is so completely destroyed that the fragments of which it is 
composed afford no indication of what it may have been. 

The heraldry to which allusion has been made consists of the 
eight shields in the wings of the window, all which upon a 
careful examination I believe to be in situ; and of ten coats in 
the centre lights. Of the last, those numbered 57, 62, 68, and 
69, may be discarded, as beiug plainly of later date than the 
rest of the glazing. The difficulty has been to determine 
the originality of the remaining six coats. I have arrived at the 
conclusion that of these only two, Nos. 60 and 70, form part 
of the original series; Nos. 58, 61, and 67 belonging to an 
earlier period, and No. 59 to a different set. But, as it is impos- 
sible to express in writing those trifling peculiarities which 
distinguish dates in painted glass, I must request the reader who 
may be disposed to dissent from my opinion to suspend his 
judgment until he shall have actually examined the glass him- 

53. Gu. a lion rampant or ; Eichard Earl of Arundel. This 
shield may be regarded as a fair type of the eight shields in 
the wing lights. These shields are nearly of the same size, 
varying in length from 13£ in. to 14 in., and in breadth from 
10 \ in. to 11 in. They are on panels, each panel having 
a white diapered ground, except No. 66, the ground of which is 
light blue diapered ; a change of colour apparently dictated by 
the white field of the shield. A small ornament, as before 
mentioned, was inserted in the lower part of each of the lights. 
Those now remaining are, in Nos. 53 and 66, a double triangle ; 
in 54, three white, and in 56, three green leaves conjoined ; in 
57, a double square ; in 62, a double rose ; in 63, a figure on a 
red ground striking at a ball with a crooked stick ; and in 
No. 64, a triangle interwoven with a trefoil. 

54. Gu. a chevron (lost, but probably) arg. between ten 
crosses patty arg.; Thomas Lord Berkeley. 

55. Gu. a fess between seven cross crosslets or; Thomas 
Earl of Warwick. 

56. This shield, which is upon a panel, is wholly made up of 
fragments, amongst which may be observed part of a narrow 
bend arg. charged with three mullets pierced gu., now placed in 
pale ; and also some fragments on a diapered blue field. The 
material used seems to be of the same date precisely as the ori- 


ginal glazing of the window. I am therefore disposed to think 
that the shield to which the charge belongs was one of the 
original series, and the Northampton coat, az. on a bend arg. 
between two cotises and six lions rampant or three mullets gu ; l 
William Earl of Northampton. 

57. Arg. two bendlets indented gu. and vert ; Ruyhall. 2 This 
shield, which is not on a panel, is 15^- in. long and 10J in. broad, 
and therefore considerably exceeds -any of the panelled shields in 
size. It also greatly differs from them in shape. The texture 
of its glass, the presence of smooth ruby, the style of its diaper, 
the tenderness and want of precision of the painted lines, concur 
in indicating a date as late probably as 1385. It clearly forms 
no part of the original glazing. 

58. Gu. three lions passant guardant in pale or; King of 
England. This shield, which is not on a panel, is only 13 in. 
long and 10^ in. broad, and is therefore considerably smaller 
than the panelled shields. The lions are drawn in a much 
earlier style than those in Nos. 60 and 70, after described, from 
which, and the circumstance that the coat is neither differenced 
nor quartered with France, I conclude that it is of an earlier 
date by several years than the panelled shields. 

59. Quarterly, 1 and 4, az. semy of lis or, 2 and 3, England 
(now lost and replaced with modern glass, representing or a bend 
az.) ; King of England. This shield, which is not on a panel, is 
14 J in. long and 11 in. broad, and is therefore sensibly larger 
than the panelled shields. The glass may be of the same date 
as the original part of the window, but the size of the shield, 
and the different character of the fleurs-de-lis, as compared with 
those in Nos. 60 and 70, strongly incline me to the belief that 
the coat is not one of the original series. 

60. Quarterly, 1 and 4, az. semy of lis or, 2 and 3, three lions 
passant guardant in pale or, a label arg.; Edward the Black 
Prince. This shield, which is not on a panel, is 13J in. long, 
and 11 in. broad, and therefore agrees in size with a panelled 
shield. The lions and fleurs-de-lis are drawn in precisely the 
same style as those in No. 70, and the texture of the glass 
is identical with that of the original part of the window. I 
think it is one of the original coats. The quarterings of 

1 The same coat formerly existed in Longdon, if I remember right, it was 

the east window of Longdon church, shown by a black dot. 
Staffordshire. In the Gloucester ex- 2 See Nash's 'Worcestershire,' vol. ii. 

ample, the eye or piercing of the mullets p. 86. 
is denoted by a small black ring ; in the 


England are formed of plain pieces of yellow pot-metal glass, on 
which the lions are painted in outline. Another example of 
this very common practice of simplifying glazier's work is 
afforded by No. 63. 

61. Gu. three lions passant guardant or, a bend az. ; Henry of 
Lancaster. 1 

This shield, which is not on a panel, is only 12 J in. long and 
10 in. broad, and is therefore considerably smaller than the 
panelled shields. The lions are drawn in a decidedly earlier 
style than those in Nos. 60 and 70, and precisely resemble those 
in No. 67. I think that the glass may be put as early as 1310 
or 1315, and therefore that it forms no part of the original 

62. This shield, which is not on a panel, is made up of a coat 
clearly of the fifteenth century, which exhibits the instruments 
of the Passion, and partly of fragments added to make it of the 
some size as the other shields. 

63. Quarterly, 1 and 4, barry arg. and az. an orle of martlets 

gu. 2 and 3, a maunche ; Lawrence, or John, E. of 

Pembroke. 2 The Hastings quarterings (properly, or a maunche 
gu.) are formed of pieces of pot-metal yellow glass, on which the 
maunche is drawn in outline. In the third quartering the field 
is smeared over with brown paint. 

64. Gru. a lion rampant and bordure engrailed or ; Gilbert, or 
Richard, Lord Talbot. 

65. Gu. a chevron erm. between ten crosses paty arg. ; Sir 
Maurice de Berkeley. 

1 If I am right in my supposition as heir, who died in 1325, leaving Lawrence, 
to the date of this coat, it would be that his son and heir, an infant. Being one 
of Henry, son of Edmund Crouchback, of the coheirs of the last Earl, he was 
Earl of Lancaster, borne during the declared Earl of Pembroke by Ed- 
lifetime of his brother, Thomas Earl of ward III., while in Flanders, in October, 
Lancaster, who was executed in 1321. 1339, which was a short time before 
See Archaeological Journal, x. p. 329. that king quartered France and England. 

2 This very early example of two The Earl appears to have soon followed 
coats borne quarterly, viz. Valence and this example, and he placed the arms of 
Hastings, deserves a passing notice. The Valence, like those of France, in the 
grandson of Earl Lawrence is commonly first and fourth quarters, as the more 
said to have been the first English sub- honourable coat. A yet earlier example 
ject that bore such a coat. See, how- of a quarterly coat borne by an English 
ever, Archaeological Journal, ii. p. 343. subject occurs in the roll of arms, t. 
John de Hastings, the grandfather of Edw. II., that of Sir Simon de Montagu, 
Earl Lawrence, married one of the being in modern blazon first and fourth 
sisters and coheiresses of Aylmer de arg. a dance (or fess fusily) gu. ; second 
Valence, Earl of Pembroke, and died and third arg. a griffin or. 

in 1313, leaving by her a son, John, his 


66. Arg. on a quarter gu. a rose or; Thomas Lord Bra- 

67. Chi. three lions passant guardant or, a label of France ; 
Thomas Earl of Lancaster. 1 

This shield, which is not on a panel, is only 13 in. long and 
1(H in. broad, and is therefore considerably smaller than the 
panelled shields. The lions are drawn in precisely the same 
style as those in No. 61, with which coat the present seems 
coeval. It clearly forms no part of the original series. 

6S. Quarterly, 1 and 4, az. semy of lis or, 2 and 3, gu. three 
lions passant guardant in pale or, a label of three points arg., each 
point charged with as many (circles in outline hatched with dark 
lines, a common way of representing) torteaux; Edmund of 
Langley, Duke of York, 1385-1402. 

This shield, which is not on a panel, agrees in character in 
every respect with the date above indicated, and clearly forms 
no part of the original series. 

69. France and England quarterly ; King of England. 

This shield, which is not on a panel, is of the same date as the 
last, and forms no part of the original series. 

70. Gu. three lions passant guardant or, a label of France ; 
Henry Earl of Lancaster. 2 

This shield, which is not on a panel, has lost part of its upper 
edge ; but if completed, it would be of the same size as one of 
the panelled shields. The lions and fleurs-de-lis are drawn in 
the same style, and the glass is of the same character, as 
in No. 60. I believe that it is one of the original coats. 

The date which I should feel obliged to assign to the glass- 
painting in this window, upon a consideration of its style and 
execution, irrespectively of the heraldry, would be some time 
between 1340 and 1350> 

1 See note to No. 61. it and the glass in the west window of 

2 He was only son of the Henry of Winchester Cathedral is so marked as 
Lancaster whose coat I have supposed to make me desirous to put the one as 
No. Gl to be, and who was restored as early, and the other as late, as proba- 
Earl of Lancaster in 1 3'27. He sue- bility will allow. I have reason to think 
ceeded his father as Earl of Lancaster that the Winchester glass is the work 
in 13+5, and was created Duke of Lan- of Bishop Edington, who died in 136G 
caster in 1351, having been previously (see notice of the painted glass at Win- 
created Earl of Derby in 1337. Chester, in Proceedings of the Archseo- 

3 A consideration of the style and logical Institute, at their meeting there 
supposed date of other painted windows in 1845, p. 3, and p. 65 of the present 
would render it difficult to assign to the volume). The style of this glass is 
Gloucester glass a date later than 1350. transitional, but it partakes much more 
Indeed, the difference of style between of the character of the glazing in New 


I propose now to inquire what more precise date is indicated 
by these coats of arms. For this purpose we must devote our 
attention exclusively to the original coats. Of these, which 
were fourteen in number, it has been shown that there are ten 
remaining, viz. those of the Black Prince ; Henry Earl of Lan- 
caster ; Richard Earl of Arundel ; Thomas Lord Berkeley ; 
Thomas Earl of Warwick ; William Earl of Northampton ; 
Lawrence, or John, Earl of Pembroke ; Gilbert, or Richard, 
Lord Talbot; Sir Maurice de Berkeley; and Thomas Lord 
Bradeston ; and that all these are in situ, except those of the 
Black Prince and the Earl of Lancaster. Of the four missing 
coats no doubt that of Edward III. (France and England 
quarterly) was one. Yet it is evident that this was not a group 
of the arms of the king and princes of the blood, and the nobles 
allied to them, in the latter part of the reign of that sovereign, 
such as occurs occasionally. Nor was it a group of the arms of 
families in the county, or of any family and its alliances ; nor is 
there any reason to suppose that they were the arms of some of 
the principal benefactors to the abbey ; nor is it likely that 
these noblemen would have joined in presenting this window, 
and on that account have had their arms placed in it. They 
are, in fact, the arms of a prince and certain noblemen renowned 
for military talent and bravery, who distinguished themselves in 
the wars in France under Edward III. ; and their coats were in 
all probability displayed in this window to do them honour, or 
to commemorate companionship in arms. 1 Let us then proceed 

College Chapel, Oxford, which probably volved in the window, 

was put up between 1379 and 1386 (see J In the Scrope and Grosvenor Roll, 

Archaeological Journal, ix. p. 46, and p. we learn from two witnesses of the 

146 of the present volume), than of the Hastings family examined 10 Rich. II., 

Gloucester glass. The more exact date, that their grandfather had, sixty years 

1347 or 1348, which the heraldry enables before, placed in a window in his own 

us to assign to the Gloucester window, chapel the coat of Geoffrey le Scrope 

is in most strict accordance with proba- because they had been fellow-soldiers, 

bility, nor is it inconsistent with any The coats of other friends may have 

of the ascertained dates of the building, been there also, but the object of the 

It may be conceded that the east examination required only the mention 

window was already glazed when Abbot of the Scrope arms. A more singular 

Horton's work (consisting of the interior mode of manifesting friendship by 

fittings of the choir, see Professor Willis's means of heraldry appears in the evi- 

sketch of the History of Gloucester dence of the Prior of Merton, examined 

Cathedral, Archaeological Journal, vol. in the same year. Sir Alexander de 

xvii. p. 336) was begun, in 1368. To Neville, an uncle of the then Lord 

my learned friend Mr. W. S. Walford Neville, had a surcoat or jupon (cote 

my best acknowledgments are due for cfarmes) embroidered with his own 

the assistance he has afforded me in arms, and all the quarters filled with 

dealing with the heraldic question in- small escutcheons of the arms of his 


to ascertain what Ave may infer from these escutcheons as to the 
time when this glass was executed. 

John de Hastings, Earl of Pembroke, succeeded his father 
Lawrence in 1348, when only about a year old; we may there- 
fore confidently assume that this coat would not have been placed 
in this window in compliment to the son as early as 1362, for 
he was then a boy of not more than fifteen years of age. To a 
later date the heraldry cannot with any probability be referred, 
because in the year last mentioned the arms of Henry Earl of 
Lancaster, and also those of William Earl of Northampton, had 
been discontinued ; for the former died in 1361, without issue 
male ; and the latter died in 13(50, and his son and heir became 
in the year following the head of the family, by succeeding his 
uncle in the earldom of Hereford ; when he no doubt ceased to 
bear this differenced coat, which had been his father's. Add to 
which, Thomas Lord Bradeston had died in 1360, leaving an 
infant grandson his heir. We must therefore go back to 1348, 
or a trifle earlier, when Lawrence de Hastings, Earl of Pem- 
broke, was living. Very little farther back can we go, because 
the Black Prince was only ten years old in 1340, and was not 
knighted till 1346. It is therefore highly probable that this 
glass, if it were not executed in 1347 or 1348, was designed or 
ordered then, and executed within a year or two after. 

It appears that Ave have in the window a group of the arms 
of some of the heroes in the campaign of 1346-7, Avhich is famous 
for the victory at Cressy, and the successful siege of Calais. 
The Black Prince, as is well known, commenced his glorious 
career at Cressy. He led the first division, being assisted by the 
Earls of Warwick and Oxford ; the second Avas under the com- 
mand of the Earls of Arundel and Northampton ; and the third 
Avas commanded by the King in person. Thomas Lord Berkeley, 
his brother Sir Maurice de Berkeley, Richard Lord Talbot, and 
Thomas Lord Bradeston, Avho Avere all in that expedition, 1 Avere 
probably among the combatants as bannerets, though I find no 
special mention of them on that occasion. The Earl of Lan- 
caster Avas not at Cressy ; he had been sent to Guienne, and was 
besieged in Aiguillon by the Duke of Normandy; for the relief 
of Avhich place was originally destined the army that landed in 

friends. His arms were gu. a saltier ' Barnes's History of Edward III., 
org. a martlet sat. Roll, t. Edw. III., p. 3-10 ct scq., and Dugdale's Baronage. 
edited by Sir H. Nicolas. 


Normandy, and fought at Cressy, and very soon afterwards in- 
vested Calais. With that Earl was Lawrence Earl of Pembroke, 
who had already acquired a great military reputation for so 
young a man. One effect of the victory at Cressy was the rais- 
ing of the siege of Aiguillon ; and these two earls, after some 
raids in the south of France, returned to England, and a few 
months afterwards joined the King before Calais. 1 

The siege of that town, which commenced in September, 1346, 
continued till the 4th of August, 1347. It was there that, in 
the latter year, Sir Maurice de Berkeley was killed. In the 
following year the Earl of Pembroke died, being little more than 
thirty years of age. The cause of his death I have not found 
mentioned ; possibly it was some malady induced by exertion 
and exposure at the siege. It is not improbable that the three 
missing coats (in addition to the royal arms) were those of the 
Earls of Oxford, Hereford, and Huntingdon, who all held im- 
portant commands in the campaign. Although Sir Maurice de 
Berkeley and the Earl of Pembroke may have been dead before 
this glass-painting was executed, it would have been quite 
natural under the circumstauces to include their coats in com- 
memoration of them, whether we suppose the window to have 
been presented by one of their fellow-soldiers, or put up by the 
abbot and convent. 

It will be observed that the barons whose arms are displayed 
were not the most distinguished of those who were at Cressy or 
Calais; but they and Sir Maurice de Berkeley were all more 
or less connected with the county of Gloucester ; Lord Talbot 
having, as it would seem, only one manor within it. The Earl 
of Pembroke held numerous lordships in the adjoining marches 
of Wales. 

If I were to hazard a conjecture as to the person to whom we 
are indebted for this noble window, I should say it was Lord 
Bradeston. He was of the county, and was a vassal of the lord 
of Berkeley, having held some knight's fees of that honour. A 

1 The urgent summons for these two in France). Edward was at that time 

earls and others to go to the king's threatened with an attack by all the 

assistance may be seen in Rymer (new force which the King of France could 

ed.), iii. p. 120. No doubt they both bring against him. Both these earls, 

obeyed. That the Earl of Lancaster befox*e they went to Guienne, had served 

did is well known; and Dugdale, on the iu Flanders with all the other noblemen 

authority of the Eotuli Francice, states above mentioned whose arms were 

that the Earl of Pembroke, "in 21 originally in the window, except perhaps 

Edw. III., was again in those wars " {i.e. Richard Lord Talbot. 


fortunate as well as a valiant soldier, though the beginning of his 
career was rather ambiguous, he gained the favour of Edward III., 
who in the fifth year of his reign confirmed to him for life the 
Castle, Barton, and Tyne of Gloucester, which he had previously 
obtained through the influence of Queen Isabella. 1 This acqui- 
sition must have made him of some importance in the town and 
neighbourhood. According to Dugdale, he and Sir Maurice 
de Berkeley were inseparable companions, and were created 
bannerets at the same time. In 1342 he was summoned to Par- 
liament. Now, on the supposition that he was the donor, the 
arrangement of the arms is in accordance with the sentiments of 
the age. The arms of the king, the prince, and the earls, have 
the most honourable places ; except that the coat of Lord Berkeley, 
whose barony was a very ancient one, and whose vassal Lord 
Bradeston was, is placed amongst those of the earls; while the 
coat of Lord Bradeston himself is in the least honourable place, 
though as a baron he was of higher rank than Sir Maurice de 
Berkeley; but next before it is that of his deceased friend Sir 
Maurice. Had Lord Berkeley, or the abbot and convent, put 
up the glass, I should have expected Lord Berkeley's coat to 
have been where we find the Earl of Pembroke's, and Lord 
Bradeston's in the place of Sir Maurice de Berkeley's. 

The conclusion, however, which the foregoing remarks warrant 
as to the date of this glass, is not affected by any uncertainty in 
regard to the person by whom it was presented or the cost of it 
defrayed. Seeing how very closely the result of the evidence 
afforded by the heraldry agrees with that derived from an exa- 
mination of the style and execution of the various subjects and 
details throughout, I think I am fully justified in stating that 
the conception of this truly interesting glass-painting may be 
attributed to 1347 or 1348, and that it was completed within a 
year or two after that date, and most probably not later than 
1350. This opinion has been formed with the more confidence 
as the evidence afforded by this ancient monument has happily 
not been destroyed or tampered with by any modern restorer. 

1 This grant was made to him for his year before Lord Bradeston's death, and 

life at a yearly rent payable to the he is said to have died seised of the 

Exchequer. Some change, however, in castle, with a meadow called Castle- 

the terms of his tenure seems to have mead, and the Tyne called Castle Coule. 

taken place, for Dugdale mentions that See Dugd. Baronage, ii. pp. 138, 139. 

about 33 Edw. III. he was appointed The Tyne was probably some newly- 

governor of Gloucester Castle, with 601. enclosed ground, 
a year for that service. This was the 



All critical investigators of ancient monuments, all lovers of 
truth and genuineness, are but too well aware of the terrible 
significance which the misapplied word "Restoration" has 
acquired of recent years. The ravages of time, the obliteration 
and confusion consequent on repeated repairs, or the much-abused 
churchwarden's " beautification," are really trifling evils com- 
pared with that careful and elaborate eradication of trustworthy 
features, which is always found to be the more absolute and 
complete as we are assured that a "restoration" has been "skil- 
ful," " costly," or " thorough." It is seldom that an ordinary 
workman evinces a love of unnecessary mischief, or that he pos- 
sesses knowledge enough to enable him to do extensive injury : 
but where the so-called "Restorer" comes, he rarely fails to 
make an utter devastation, leaving the puzzled inquirer no 
means of forming an opinion more satisfactory than one based 
on the merest conjecture, as to what may have been the original 
import or appearance of the work. 

To the Archaeological Institute may be ascribed the credit of 
having rescued the interesting window above described from this 
destructive process. The stonework had so far yielded to the 
effects of time as to necessitate its being rebuilt, and the lead- 
work of the glazing Mas so decayed as to render its complete 
repair imperative. Application was not unnaturally made by 
the Cathedral authorities to some leading firms of glass-painters 
for advice as to the course to be pursued in respect of the painted 
glass. Each recommended a "Restoration," varying only in 
extent. One proposed merely a restoration of the missing parts 
of the existing design; two others were for improving upon it, — 
the one, by " working out the idea of a Heaven in the tracery ;" 
the other, by " filling the entire window with rich glass." These 
schemes were much considered during the meeting of the Insti- 
tute held at Gloucester in 1800. And upon its appearing, from 
a careful examination of the glazing in its then untouched state, 
that a restoration of the missing parts of the existing design 
would necessarily be for the most part conjectural, and that it 
would at all events involve the introduction of so much new 
glass as must of necessity have completely changed the general 
aspect of the window, it was wisely determined by the Dean and 
Chapter, at the earnest recommendation of several members of 
the Institute, to preserve the wreck that remained by a mere 
releading of the glass, and to attempt nothing in the way of 
restoration, beyond supplying such insignificant parts of the 


coloured grounds as were wanting with modern glass of corre- 
sponding hue. 1 So rigidly has this determination been adhered 
to, that even the figure at the top of the window (No. 1), which 
is evidently not in situ, has been reinstated : an expressive inti- 
mation that things were left as they were found. 

The archaeological inquirer has, therefore, precisely the same 
moans of investigation now as he would have had before the 
recent repairs, if we except such guidance as the ancient lead- 
work supplied, and which was useful chiefly for the assistance it 
afforded in determining the authenticity of the glazing of the 
tracery lights ; and the artist may study the remains of the ori- 
ginal glass and observe its fine tone and texture as heretofore. 
Having had occasion to compare these notes, written for the 
most part before the glazing was moved, with the window since 
its repair, I conlcl detect no other difference in its appearance 
than what would naturally result from the glass having been 
unavoidably freed from a good deal of the whitewash and mortar 
which in course of years had encumbered its surface. 

Apart from the historical associations which attach to every 
ancient work, and pre-eminently to the present, it may be 
doubted whether the Gloucester window does not owe most of 
its popularity to the fine tone and rich hue of its glass. It 
would be impossible to meet with white glass that is more solid 
and silvery in effect; the red is beautifully varied, and is most 
luminous even in its deepest parts ; 2 and the tone of the blue can 
hardly be surpassed. It must also be admitted that the general 
design, through the size and simplicity of its parts, is calculated 
to produce a good and distinct effect at a distance, and that the 
execution of the painting, rough and imperfect though it be, is, 
on account of its crispness and boldness, well adapted to the 

' The following statistics may not glass-painters for the proposed restora- 

be uninteresting. The glazing of the tions alluded to in the text were as 

window, when taken down, amounted to follows: for the first, 11411. 4s. 6c/. ; for 

about 2000 square feet; and weighed, the second, 1700/.; for the third, 1170/. 

including the leadwork, about 35 cwt. Their moderation is not questioned. 

It was entirely releaded for 600/. by i Any modern red glass which should 

Mr. Hughes, of Frith Street, Soho, equal in hue the deeper portions of the 

whose reparations of the north rose original red glass used in this window 

window of Lincoln Cathedral, and of a would be nearly opaque ; whereas all 

window at North Moreton church, the old is clear and transparent : the 

Berks, have been noticed in the Archaeo- reason for the difference being that the 

logical Journal, vol. xiv. p. 211, and laminae of colouring matter are at a 

vol. xviii. p. 153, and p. 222 of the pre- greater distance apart in the old streaked 

sent volume. The estimates of the other ruby than in the modern smooth ruby. 


nature of glass, so potent of its kind. But here our admiration 
should stop. Like all other mediaeval works in painted glass, 
the present is open to the gravest criticism. The figures are 
ill-drawn, ungraceful, and insipid. The shading, though sufficient 
both in depth and quantity, if handled with skill, to have pro- 
duced a due effect of relief — an effect which obviously had been 
aimed at — is so inartificially employed as to be useful only so 
far as it serves to impart tone and richness to the composition, 
and by contrast to increase its brilliancy. Every part of the 
figure, and all the members of the shrinework, seem to be equally 
in the same plane; though the real depth of the design, as 
shown by the lines of the drawing, and the very nature of the 
composition, is considerable. 1 Whatever general distinctness of 
effect it possesses is due to the completeness with which the 
simple forms of the white figures and canopies are cut out and 
insulated by the coloured grounds, an achievement of no great 

I make these remarks not in a spirit of disparagement — the 
work was a great one in the uncritical times in which it was 
executed — but in the hope, if possible, of arousing attention to 
the lowness of the standard to which we, who deem ourselves so 
enlightened in the nineteenth century, are labouring to conform 

1 All antiquaries know that the This hardly requires any serious refu- 
" ironed- out-flat " style was never pecu- tation. According to our critic, the 
liar to pictures on glass, but equally representation of a man rendered visible 
characterises the wall and easel pictures by the agency of transmitted light is 
of a time when art was in its imma- " a transparent man ; " not a transparent 
turity. If we condemn the feature in representation of a man, as ordinai-y 
the one case, we cannot consistently persons might be disposed to consider 
regard it with favour iu the other. I it. His objection, if sound, would ex- 
was concerned to read in so sensible a elude from representation in painted 
print as the Athenceum (20 Dec. 1862), glass all objects but those which are by 
certain critical dicta on glass-painting, nature pellucid. Imperfection, however 
which, with a pretended air of philo- ludicrous, in the imitation of an opaque 
sophy, reduce the art to mere coloured object, would fail to render it admissible, 
glaziug. The writer supports an objec- For a representation of a man, treated 
tion to the use of a well-known picture decoratively, and so far conventionalised, 
by a German artist as a design for a as in no way to imitate the aspect of 
glass-painting, by asking, " Can any- life — such as the knave of spades — if 
thing be more absurd than the idea of a transferred to a painted window, would 
transparent man ? " and he goes on to still be " a transparent man," as much 
say, that in a glass-painting all the as, and no more than, the most lifelike 
" details must be treated decoratively, and pictorial representation of such an 
not pictorially, and so far conventional- object in painted glass could be. Are 
ised that in no way do they imitate, as we to give up, for the theories of such a 
a picture rightly does, the aspect of life, critic as this, the practice of the best ages 
otherwise we come to transparent men." and greatest artists in glass-painting ? 



in our Church decorations: 1 a circumstance which would be 
utterly inexplicable did not experience show that a fashion, in 
every age, has never been the less omnipotent on account of its 
absurdity, or even ugliness. 

1 Nothing could be worse, as a whole, 
than the English specimens of glass- 
painting at the International Exhibition 
of 1862 ; or indeed more discouraging, 
considering the immense sums expended 
of late on this species of decoration. 
The Royal Commissioners would seem 

to have preferred to render their awards 
absolutely valueless by distributing 
prizes to the bad and indifferent alike, 
rather than to waste time on a critical 
investigation, which probably could not 
have been attended with auy very bene- 
ficial result. 

From Adderbury Church, Oxon. 



(From the 'Archaeological Journal,' vol. xxi., 1846.) 

PjPSn^HW UE beautiful glass-paintings wliich occupy (amongst 
iO/A^si^dJ others) the seven eastern windows of the choir of 
Lichfield Cathedral belonged originally to the 
Abbey of Herckenrode, in the old episcopal princi- 
pality of Liege. They are of the Italian-Flemish 
school, and appear from dates upon them to have 
been executed between 1532 and 1539. After 
the destruction of the abbey, the glass passed into 
the possession of Sir Brooke Boothby, Bart., who transferred it 
to the Dean and Chapter of Lichfield, by whom it was placed 
where it now is, in or about the year 1803(A). 2 

At the present time, when the very refuse of the Continent is 
sought for, and even forgeries of ancient painted glass occasionally 
command high prices, such an acquisition would have produced 
no slight sensation, and a knowledge of the surpassing merit of 
these windows would have been generally diffused by means 
of the press. As it is, there is perhaps no work of equal import- 
ance in this country so little known or appreciated. 

To the antiquary this glass may appear less interesting than 
that in the Beauchamp Chapel at Warwick, to which so many 
historical and local associations attach ; but it must always be 
an object of the deepest interest to the student of glass-painting, 
anxious to trace the progress of the art, and to ascertain the 
method by which such striking and beautiful pictorial effects 
have been produced. 

To those who have recently examined the painted glass in the 
Beauchamp Chapel 3 it may seem somewhat surprising that both 

1 Read on the occasion of the visit of 
the Archaeological Institute to Lichfield, 
July 29, during the Annual Meeting 
held at Warwick, 1864. 

2 This and other letters between 
brackets refer to notes at the end. 

3 The painted glass in the Beauchamp 
Chapel was a special subject of interest 
at the Meeting at Warwick ; a Discourse 
on it, communicated by the author of 
this Memoir, forms the subject of that 
wliich follows. 


es 'Winston, del 

Vincent Brooks 


examples should have been produced by precisely the same 
technical process (B) ; and that the difference in effect between 
them, which we cannot fail to observe, should be entirely due to 
the greater skill of the artists who executed the works now 
under consideration. 

We are familiar with the expression "the new method," by 
which Vasari and other writers on art designated the practice 
of the great painters of the Renaissance. The influence of this 
practice is shown as clearly in the Lichfield windows, as is that 
of the hard, dry, flat style of the pictorial art of their day in 
the windows of the Beauchamp Chapel. And surely, if the 
"new method" of the Renaissance (the invention, be it re- 
membered, of the greatest artistic geniuses whose works have 
come down to us) is admirable, and is admired in all other kinds 
of painting, we may well ask why should its adoption in glass- 
painting alone be deemed wrong? In what does the impro- 
priety consist? Is any essential or fundamental rule of glass- 
painting thereby violated? I feel that a glance at the windows 
at Lichfield ought to set these questions at rest. But, as the 
works of the Renaissance in painted glass have been of late years 
systematically decried by a certain class of writers, not merely on 
account of their style, as being in the Italian and not the Gothic 
manner (a question with which we need not concern ourselves), 
but upon the broader ground that their design and mode of 
execution (matters perfectly distinct from style) are essentially 
erroneous, I trust that I shall not be deemed tedious if I 
endeavour briefly to show that in works like those at Lichfield 
there really is no violation of the conditions imposed by the 
nature of glass, considered as a material affording a means of 
art. I am not aware, indeed, of the existence of any conditions 
that can be supposed to prohibit an artist from producing as 
perfect a pictorial effect in a glass-painting as he is able, pro- 
vided he does not unnecessarily or excessively reduce the trans- 
parency and brilliancy of the glass. 

The principal objections urged are, I believe, that the artists 
of the Renaissance ought not to have attempted pictures in 
painted glass, or anything higher than mere coloured mosaics, 
because the nature of glass is such that more complete and 
perfect pictures can be produced by other methods of painting ; 
that their works are overshaded, and therefore unsuited to the 
nature of a translucent material ; and that the attempt to form 
a picture in glass is always accompanied by a diminution, in a 
certain degree, of the depth of colouring. 


The first objection can easily be disposed of, upon the ground 
that it tends unnecessarily to limit the resources of art. Ex- 
perience shows that we take delight in various methods of repre- 
sentation, some of which are certainly not less imperfect than 
glass-painting ; and that an artist's power in meeting and over- 
coming technical difficulties always forms a large ingredient in 
our estimate of his abilities. 

To the second it may be answered, that, though it is true that 
translucency is the essential characteristic of a painting upon 
glass, and that any practice tending unnecessarily to reduce it 
must be vicious, yet, as it is impossible to give force and ex- 
pression to a glass-painting without some diminution of its 
transparency, the extent to which obscuration may properly be 
carried becomes a question of degree. Thus we rightly condemn 
the use of enamel colouring, that is to say, the method of 
colouring glass with enamels, instead of (as in the windows at 
Lichfield) using for the coloured parts of the picture glass 
coloured in its manufacture, and not afterwards, and which is as 
transparent as white glass itself. For though more varied and 
even truer effects of colour are obtainable by means of enamels, 
such gain is disproportioned to the loss of effect through the dul- 
ness and want of brilliancy occasioned by the use of enamel 
colouring. But the employment of an opaque enamel colour 
for the purpose of producing the chiaroscuro of a picture in 
glass is legitimate, if confined within reasonable limits. 

The third objection must necessarily fall to the ground upon 
its appearing that pictorial compositions of a higher nature than 
mere mosaics are allowable in painted glass, as being unopposed 
to any rule of glass-painting ; for, without using colours varying 
in degrees of depth, it would be impossible to impart requisite 
distinctness and relief. 

In determining the various questions involved, we naturally 
turn to ancient examples as affording the best means of com- 
parison and selection. But, before submitting ourselves to the 
teaching of antiquity, we should do well to bear in mind that 
mediaeval architecture and mediaeval painted glass stand upon 
a very different footing. The one had reached a point high 
enough to place it in the first rank of the architectural styles of 
the world, at a time when the art of representation on a plane 
surface (including glass-painting) was comparatively in its 
infancy. The latter, as is well known, did not attain perfection 
in the north of Euroj^e until the period to which these very 
glass-paintings belong, and not until after the decline of Gothic 


architecture. The accidental association therefore of the earlier 
styles of glass-painting with (4othic buildings is far from proving 
that any necessary or scientific connection exists between the 
best Gothic architecture and the state of the art of representa- 
tion as then practised in glass-painting. Nor ought we to be 
deterred by any such association from condemning, along with 
their bad drawing, the confusion and want of relief which in a 
greater or less degree characterise all the painted windows 
executed previously to the second quarter of the sixteenth cen- 
tury. It is observable, however, that the most keen opponents 
of cinquecento art justify, on the score of taste, their preference 
of what may be familiarly designated the " ironed-out-flat 
style " in painted glass — a style in which complicated compositions 
intended to represent objects occupying various distances from 
the eye are so inartificially drawn, shaded, and coloured, as to 
look as if they had all been compressed flat into one plane, as is 
exemplified in old windows. (C.) 

It may be admitted that a composition of a flatter nature 
than is absolutely demanded by the conditions of glass-painting 
might occasionally be employed with advantage, if it was treated 
artistically, and did not exhibit (like the ironed-out-flat style) 
the flatness which results merely from feebleness and imperfect 
knowledge. And such a glass-painting, in proportion to its 
simplicity and approach to a mere mosaic, might display a more 
uniform degree of brilliancy, and a more uniform expanse of the 
deepest colouring, than would be possible in one of a more com- 
plex and pictorial character. But it would be found very difficult 
to design such a composition upon a very large scale ; nor would 
its style be suitable for general adoption, since it would neces- 
sarily confine the subjects of glass-painting to a very few, and 
those of the simplest nature. Practically, therefore, our choice 
would be in favour of glass-paintings more nearly approaching 
the character of pictures (of which class those at Lichfield, and 
other contemporary works, might be considered to be the type) 
on its appearing that they exhibited the highest pictorial effect 
of which glass-painting can be rendered capable, without vio- 
lating that condition of the art which forbids undue obscuration 
of the material. That they do not infringe this rule is actually 
proved by those most opposed to the style in question, who 
occasionally place in invidious comparison with " the overloaded 
(with enamel) and overshaded cinquecento," medieval works in 
which shadow not unfrequently occurs equal in quantity, and 
even more opaque than what was used in the cinquecento style. 


It is a fact that the fourteenth- century figures and canopies in 
the east window of Gloucester Cathedral are more profusely and 
densely shaded than the pictures at Lichfield, and other examples 
might be adduced. Doubtless the effect of relief thus produced 
in these early works is very inferior to that in the Lichfield 
glass-paintings; but this, after all proper allowance has been 
made for the difference of material, is found to be due only to 
the greater skill and knowledge with which the shading in the 
later works is executed : the aggregate amount of obscuration is 
about the same in both instances. Nor, indeed, do the Benais- 
sance glass-paintings of this particular period, although so pic- 
torial, and exhibiting such masses of shadow, at all suffer by 
comparison with the most brilliant mediasval examples. On the 
other hand, the comparative dulness of glass-paintings of a later 
date, though scarcely attended by any corresponding advantage, 
proves that the obscuration of the material had reached its 
proper limit in such works as those now under consideration. 
That these glass-paintings also exhibit the greatest pictorial 
effect of which glass is legitimately susceptible, is manifest on 
comparing them both with earlier and later examples. 

The radical error of the earlier works of the Eenaissance is 
the complicated nature of their composition ; that of the later 
is the complicated nature of their chiaroscuro ; for to deal with 
either composition or chiaroscuro successfully would require 
resources not possessed by the glass-painter. His difficulties 
spring from the fewness of the glass colours, their uniform 
brightness, the impossibility of providing hues and tones to 
modify or unite them, and the imperfect means of imitating 
light and shade. 

The evil attending the use of too complicated compositions is 
shown in the windows of King's College Chapel, Cambridge, 
and the east window of St. Margaret's church, Westminster (D). 
These are mostly overcrowded with groups of figures extending 
backwards into the extreme distance, which is elevated to an 
absurd height in order to display them. The background 
occupies too large a proportion of the picture to admit of its 
being executed in the few retiring tints which glass supplies, 
without injury to the general colouring ; other colours are there- 
fore necessarily introduced, which come as forward as those in 
the foreground (E). The effect is flat and confused, however 
skilfully the light and shade may be managed. To a certain 
extent the same fault is observable in such of the glass-paintings 
at Lichfield as exhibit groups of figures in the distance, and 


especially where the colours used are primary, or strongly 

We become only the more sensible of the disagreeable effect 
occasioned by the attempt to produce complicated chiaroscuro in 
painted glass, by contemplating the very works in which the 
experiment has been carried out with the most success, viz., 
those large pictures on glass, common towards the close of the 
last and at the commencement of the present century, which 
were faithfully copied from oil-paintings especially remarkable 
for the breadth and variety of their light and shade. The glass, 
like the canvas, is shaded all over gradually from a point of 
light ; but it is immediately perceived that an extensive mass 
of shadow in glass fails as an imitation of shade. It looks flat, 
dry, and even flimsy, and suggests rather the idea of a dirty 
window that has been sprinkled with drops of rain, than of clear 
immaterial gloom, such as is so well expressed by the shadow in 
an oil-painting (F). To the same cause, the attempting too 
much in the way of chiaroscuro, may be traced the dulness of 
almost all the glass-paintings that were executed after the middle 
of the sixteenth century. 

Subject to these introductory observations, I would invite 
attention to the manner in which the difficulties of the art have 
been met or evaded, and its resources developed, in the glass at 
Lichfield. Whether it was dictated by a profound knowledge 
of the material or by timidity, by the influence of traditional 
rules or by some happy chance, we must admit that the end 
proposed was admirably adapted to the means. 

The picture is extremely simple in its composition, consisting 
of a foreground group, a landscape background of a sketchy 
character, and a clear bine sky. As a rule, it is represented as 
if seen through an architectural framework or canopy, which is 
more or less connected with the group by means of piers or 
columns introduced in the background. The whole is har- 
moniously coloured upon a principle of relief and general re- 
semblance to nature. The more positive colours, and those 
possessing the greatest degrees of depth, are confined to the 
foreground, being used in the group and in the ornaments of 
the architectural framework. The more qualified — the lighter 
shades and retiring tints — are employed in the background and 
sky. The architectural framework or canopy is composed prin- 
cipally of white glass shaded with brown, and enriched with 
yellow stain. It is adorned with garlands and other ornaments 
in which, as being the objects nearest the eye, the colours are 


with propriety harmoniously contrasted. In the group har- 
monious gradations of colour occur, though, on accoimt of the 
nature of the material, the harmony of contrast prevails. Its 
colouring is moreover so arranged that the eye is insensibly led 
up to some striking point or spot, produced by the decided intro- 
duction of one of the primary colours, or by a strong contrast, 
which gives light and spirit to the composition. In the distance 
and sky the harmony is that of gradation or resemblance. In 
general the most successful pictures are those in which the 
landscapes are wholly formed of different tints of grey, modified 
with brown shading and the yellow stain, for in these windows 
the space occupied by the landscape and sky is intentionally 
,so confined by the architectural framework, or by some other 
means, as to prevent its colour presenting too extensive a mass. 
The horizon is sometimes lighter, sometimes darker, but always 
more solid in appearance than the sky, which is left clear and 
transparent ; whilst the brilliancy of the landscape is necessarily 
more or less subdued by the enamel brown used in the drawing 
and shading. The architectural distances are generally rendered 
with much fidelity and consistency. They are worked out chiefly 
on white glass with drawing and shading, and the occasional 
addition of the yellow stain. To a certain extent the colours 
are united and brought together by the enamel brown with 
which the chiaroscuro of the picture is represented, but the 
harmony of the colouring depends principally on the skill shown 
in arranging the pieces of coloured glass. It is true that all the 
colours used are very modified in their tone, more so indeed 
than those of any other period, but this has only rendered their 
harmonious disposition so much the less difficult. 

In the subject of Christ before Pilate the harmony of colouring 
is effected principally by contrast. In the picture above, Christ 
bearing the Cross, it is produced chiefly by gradation of resem- 
blance. In the subject of the Day of Pentecost a curious 
example is afforded of gradation of colour worked out very 
completely. One of the most beautiful, as well as most pictu- 
resque, of the architectural backgrounds is that in the Lord's 
Supper, in the east window. 

The force and expression of the picture are of course chiefly 
given by its chiaroscuro. And, bearing in mind what has been 
said of the ill effect of very extensive masses of shade in painted 
glass, it is remarkable that here, as in the works generally of 
this period, the shadows are always confined within compara- 
tively narrow limits. The chiaroscuro, though very powerful, is 


extremely simple. The requisite relief is imparted by means 
rather of strong but harmonious contrasts, than by gradations 
of light and shade. 

The subjects are treated as if they were seen in the open air, 
whatever their situation may be. A point of light is barely if 
at all distinguishable. It is seldom that a figure, even in the 
rear of a group, is entirely in shade. The light is usually made 
to fall on all the figures alike, and the dark or shaded side of 
one figure is contrasted and relieved against the light side of the 
next. For the more extensive shadows necessary to give breadth 
and relief to the composition, recourse is had to the soffits or 
roofs of the architectural framework, under or behind which the 
group is placed, and which are deeply shaded. A pillar, or other 
architectural accessory, is not unfrequently represented in shadow 
behind the group. The shaded soffit is contrasted with the clear 
sky and with the fall light on the front of the architectural 
framework or canopy ; the shaded pillar or other accessory is 
contrasted with the landscape background, which is represented 
in full light, or with the sky. Instances of these various modes 
of producing relief by means of shadows of limited extent may 
be met with in nearly all these glass-paintings. The artifice is 
most shown in the subject of the Annunciation on the north side 
of the choir ; the principal mass of shadow here is on the roof of 
the apartment within which the scene occurs, and it is remarkable 
how small is the extent of its deepest part : the effectiveness 
may be readily estimated by covering this portion of the picture 
with a book or the hand. It is most concealed in the subjects 
of Christ before Pilate, and the Incredulity of St. Thomas. In 
the former, which is the most effective of all the pictures, there 
is an unusually large quantity of shade in the sunken arched 
panel which surmounts the lintel of the opening through which 
the group is viewed ; but it is so artfully disguised by means of 
the full lights introduced on the arabesques spread over the panel, 
and by their golden colour, as not to catch the eye. In the 
latter subject there is not only the dark pillar in the background, 
but an accidental shadow is cast upon the tribune behind the 
group, the scroll-work on the top of which comes darkly across 
and gives value to the bright landscape in the distance. 

The result of these various experiments and contrivances has 
been the production of a series of pictures in painted glass, 
harmonious in their colouring, simple and intelligible in their 
composition, distinct and powerful in effect, yet always brilliant 
and translucent. They also display a very advanced state of art 


in the grouping and figure-drawing, and, as works intended to be 
seen from a moderate distance, they are of unsurpassed merit. 
It is probable that, if the three apsidal windows had been painted 
for the situation they now occupy, and of which so distant a view 
is obtainable, they would have been designed in a simpler and 
severer manner, more approaching the style of those most 
powerful and striking of glass-paintings, the windows in the 
chapel of the Miraculous Sacrament and in the transepts at 
Brussels Cathedral (G). 

I am aware that in this necessarily brief and imperfect state- 
ment I may have failed to do justice to the subject. My object 
is to induce that actual study of these windows at Lichfield 
which will supply all my deficiencies. Whilst examining them 
we must constantly bear in mind that, although they have 
hitherto fortunately escaped "restoration," they have suffered 
materially from three centuries of exposure to the weather, 
The whole outer surface of the glass has become corroded, by 
which not merely the high lights, but the unpainted parts, have 
been toned down and subdued, and thereby not only a flatter 
appearance has been imparted to the windows than they must 
have possessed when recently executed, but even much of the 
effect intended by the contrast of the clear brilliancy of the sky 
with the comparative obscurity of the painted figures, architec- 
ture, and landscape, has been lost. 

Great however as these works are, they are objects of study, 
not of servile imitation. If ever the time come when the practice 
of glass-painting shall be taken up in England at the point 
where the Renaissance left it, even the best existing glass- 
paintings will be found susceptible of improvement. No advance 
has been made beyond such productions as the Lichfield windows, 
except in some recently executed by the modern Munich school. 
That school, after nearly half a century sptent in the consistent 
treatment of glass-painting as a branch of fine art, has lately 
abandoned the vicious practice of colouring glass with enamels, 
for the purer, though infinitely more difficult, method of the 
Renaissance, at the instance of those true patrons of the art who 
conceived and have carried out the greatest modern work of its 
kind, the adornment of Glasgow Cathedral with painted glass. 
The chief improvement displayed at Glasgow is the employment 
of many new and additional tints of coloured glass, which have 
enabled the artists more easily to blend them, and to avoid 
repeating in the backgrounds the colours used in the foregrounds. 
The evil of this is seen in the tendency of some of the white 


objects in the Lichfield foregrounds to unite with the architec- 
tural distances. The avoidance of distant groups and of any 
strong contrasts of colour in the backgrounds is also an improve- 
ment; and so is the occasional enlivening of the horizons by 
the introduction of rosy tints, kept in their place by means of a 
blue enamel legitimately applied in the same way as the ordinary 
shading. Some of the figures are indeed noble works of art, but 
art has always characterised the Munich school. In colouring 
and power the Glasgow windows are inferior to those at Lichfield. 
Their material, like all ordinary modern glass, is comparatively 
flimsy, and its colours are crude ; the general treatment also is 
rather of the kind suitable to fresco, which requires light colours 
and light shadows for effect at a distance, than that proper to a 
glass-painting, which, being by nature translucent, demands deep 
shadows and much powerful colouring to prevent its appearing 
weak. We must expect, however, that the Munich artists will 
rival the old glass in both particulars long before our glass- 
painters can approach it in either, unless we renounce our 
practice of encouraging the production of works that will bear 
no comparison with the high standard we usually propose to 
ourselves in secular art (H). Archaeology is not art, nor will a 
great artist ever condescend to become an archaeological pedant. 
If we could transfer him from the influence of the art of the 
modern world to the exclusive study of some phase of mediaeval 
art, Ave should only cramp his energies, and at best create a 
learned mannerist resembling a professor of religious painting in 

Supplementary Notes. 

A. — The Abbey of Herckenrode (equivalent to Herckenrood) seems to have 
been situate near the village of Hercken, in the ancient county of Loos, which 
in the seventeenth century became annexed to Liege. See ' Chronologie His- 
torique des Comtes de Loos,' L'Art de Verifier les Dates, torn. iv. 254. Liege 
was annexed to France by the treaty of Luneville in 1801, after which the 
abbey was probably dissolved. At the general peace the district became part 
of the kingdom of the Netherlands, and since the revolution in 1830 it has 
formed part of Belgium. 

The circumstances which made Lichfield Cathedral the depository of these 
fine glass-paintings are recorded in the following inscription in the east window 
of the south aisle of the choir : — 

" Quaj in apside vicina insunt, septem fenestra? picturata?, comobio canoni- 
corum Herckenrodensi quod olim exornaverant foedissime direpto atque diruto, 
novarn, et, deo volente, stabiliorem sedem hac ecclesia nacta? sunt; ope et 
consilio viri in omni judicio elegantissimi, Dom. Brooke Boothby, de Ashburn 
aula in comitatu Derb. Baronetti : anno sacro MDCCCIII." 



The following principal subjects are represented : — 

The Resurrection, and, in the distance, Christ appearing to Peter (dated 
1538) ; Christ before Pilate (dated 1539) ; the Descent from the Cross, and, in 
the distance, the three Marys anointing the Body ; Christ bearing the Cross ; 
the Incredulity of St. Thomas; the Day of Pentecost (daled 1534) ; the Day 
of Judgment ; the Betrayal ; the Triumphal Entry (dated 1538) ; the Last 
Supper, and, in the distance, Christ washing the Disciples' feet ; the Lord's 
Supper, and, in the distance, three small figures (dated 1537); the Ascension; 
the Annunciation, and, in the distance, the meeting of Mary and Elizabeth 
(dated 1539) ; Christ crowned with Thorns, and, in the distance, Christ buf- 
feted by the Soldiers ; and the Flagellation. 

The first four are in a window on the south side of the choir; the three 
following are in the next window; the next three in the southern apsidal 
window ; the next two izi the east window ; and the next three in the northern 
apsidal window. 

There are, besides, in the next window to the last, six smaller subjects repi-e- 
senting benefactors to the abbey (parts of larger subjects) ; and in the next 
four other subjects similar to the last, but of larger size. The portrait in this 
window of the Cardinal de la March, Prince Bishop of Liege 1505-1538, much 
as it has suffered from time, shows to what extent direct imitation may be 
carried in glass-painting. The tracery lights of all these windows are filled 
with fragments of painted glass of the same period as the subjects, disposed 
in a kind of mosaic pattern. Much ingenuity has been exerted in fitting 
the glass-paintings to the widths of the present windows, and the mullions to the 
divisions of the glass. Each composition was originally designed to fill a space 
divided as now, by mullions, into three parts, for the areas occupied by the 
stone-work are excluded from the designs, over which the mullions seem to 
pass, in the same manner as the horizontal saddle-bars. It may shock a modern 
architectural purist to find the mullions treated, according to their primary use, 
as mere uprights to support horizontal iron bars; but as they interfere with 
the glass composition scarcely more than upright iron bars would, the practice 
(which by the way dates from very early times) may be justified as a means of 
combining grandeur and breadth of effect in the glass-painting with the con- 
struction of a Gothic building. 

B. — This process is technically called the " mosaic method," in order to 
distinguish it from two other methods of painting glass, the " enamel " and the 
" mosaic enamel." A full description of each is given in ' An Inquiry into 
the Difference of Style observable in Ancient Glass-Paintings, especially in 
England; with Hints on Glass-Painting. By an Amateur. Parker, 1848.' 

[A description of these methods, given in the note, is here omitted, as 
they have already been described in the present volume. In the course of 
the note the author, after observing that there are satisfactory reasons for con- 
sidering the mosaic method to be the true method of glass-painting, adds, " I am 
not aware of any modern improvement upon it except the occasional use, by 
the Munich glass-painters, of an enamel of a different colour from brown for 
shading purposes."] 

C. — No one holds the earlier glass in greater respect than myself : without 
it we should not have had the cinquecento, which is the development of the 
older experience. But nothing can be less scientific or more ridiculous than 
the indiscriminate reproduction in modern works of the imperfections of 
the old. 

D. — The contracts for the King's College Chapel windows, published in 


Walpole's ' Anecdotes of Painting,' are dated 1526. It is my belief that the 
date of the window at St. Margaret's, Westminster, is about 1526. Mr. Scharf, 
in his excellent notes on the windows of King's College Chapel (see this 
Journal, vol. xii. p. 356, also vol. xiii. p. 45), which abound in valuable 
notices of Flemish glass-painters, attributes the Lichfield windows, on the 
authority of Mrs. Jameson, to Lambert Lombard of Liege, the master of Franz 
Floris, commonly called the Flemish Raphael. 

E. — An instance of this, which occurs in the east window of King's College 
Chapel, is thus noticed by Mr. Scharf, in this Journal, vol. xiii. p. 55 : — " One 
singular expedient (of preserving the balance of colour) is worth mentioning. 
In the lower right-hand subject a mass of red was required against the extensive 
blue and green of the landscape. To afford this, a large patch of the landscape 
itself was coloured bright red. At a distance it looks like a banner floating ; 
but on closer inspection rocks and grass on it are distinctly visible." 

F. — This results from the very nature of a transparent picture. The shadow 
painted upon glass is only a partial stopping out of the light, the rays of which 
are equally bright, however much diminished they maybe in size by the small- 
ness of the interstices in the coat of enamel through which they find their way. 
A similar appearance may be noticed in line-engravings, though not so easity, 
partly owing to their small size as compared with a glass-painting, but prin- 
cipally because the rays of light are there modified by being reflected from an 
opaque surface, instead of coming directly to the eye from the source of light, 
as in a glass-painting. In an oil-painting the rays, besides being reflected, 
usually pass through some medium which is not perfectly transparent. 

G. — The dates of these windows, as appearing on the glass, and as given by 
LeVy (' Histoire de la Peinture sur Verre,' Bruxelles, 1860), vary from 1537 to 
1547. The second window from the east, in the chapel, is proved by this 
author to have been designed (and he adds, executed) by Bernard van Orley, 
whom he conjectures, and with reason, to have designed the two transept win- 
dows. The fourth window from the east, in the chapel, appears, from the same 
authority, to have been designed by Michael van Coxie, and executed by Jean 
Haecht of Antwerp. Van Coxie is also stated to have designed another, and 
Haecht (or, as it is sometimes spelt, Ack) to have executed two others of the 
chapel windows. 

These works are remarkable for a simplicity of design, with a vigour and 
breadth of treatment, worthy of authors who were disciples of Raphael. In- 
tended for distant effect, they are, perhaps, less delicate and refined than the 
Lichfield windows, though entirely free from any imputation of coarseness. 
The groups are less crowded, and the figures, instead of being much under life- 
size, exceed it by several inches. The pictures resemble those at Lichfield in 
the use made of architectural accessories as an additional means of simple but 
powerful effects of light and shade, and also in the principle of their colouring, 
which is in entire harmony with the chiaroscuro of the composition, instead of 
being uncomformable with, or even opposed to it, as in earlier examples. The 
architectural frame which supports the groups and regulates the extent of 
the background is simple and grand in design. In the transept windows it is 
in the form of a pavilion, having an arched roof on piers, within which is the 
group consisting of the kneeling figures of the donors supported by their patron 
saints. In the chapel windows similar pavilions are used alternately with 
loggias, or double colonnades. All these are of two stories ; the upper is 
occupied with the figures representing an incident of the legend, the lower with 

Y 2 


the effigies of the donors and their patron saints. The perspective is modified 
so as to avoid the occurrence of uupleasing angles in the upper parts of the 
conqwsition ; and for the sake of picturesqneness the chief point of sight is a 
little removed from the middle to the side of the window. The figures are in 
strong hut simple light and shade ; the soffits of the arches and roofs, and the 
further row of piers and columns, are in deep shade. A landscape is properly 
dispensed with, since its appearance would he inconsistent with such an ele- 
vated position ahove the eye as is by the perspective shown to he occupied by 
the group, and the architecture and figures are represented as if they were 
seen in relief against a clear blue sky. The extensive mass of white which 
the architecture presents (tinted, however, with the shading and drawing upon 
it and enriched with the yellow stain) imparts, as at Lichfield, great value to 
the other colours. Garlands and other ornaments are used, the colours of 
which, when occurring in large quantities, are qualified and harmoniously 
graduated ; positive colours and strong contrasts being usually confined to the 
smaller accessories. The group is coloured generally on the same principle 
which prevails at Lichfield ; the more powerful and positive tints predominate, 
and are arranged so as to lead up to some striking point or spot of colour. In 
one of the windows, the first from the east in the chapel, the subordinate 
figures are rendered less conspicuous by the introduction of much white in the 
draperies. The sky was originally many degrees paler and less positive than 
the blue used in other parts of the picture, being rather warm grey than blue. 
That it was intended, as at Lichfield, to relieve the more positively and deeply 
coloured, and comparatively more solid, figures and architecture, is shown by 
the placing of blue draperies immediately against it. In consequence, how- 
ever, of a most unfortunate and injurious " restoration" which within the last 
fourteen years has befallen these windows (in course of which a large propor- 
tion of the original glazing has either been altogether removed, on the pretext 
of being disfigured with cracks, and supplied by modern glass, or toned down 
with an enamel colour), the skies, for the most part, have been obscured, their 
colour also deepened and rendered more positive, to the manifest deterioration 
of the relief of the pictures. The upper subject, indeed, of one of the chapel 
windows appears almost as if it had been painted on a blue ground. Ignorance 
of the extent of the restoration has probably betrayed some writers into the 
assertion that these windows are in character flat, like the mediaeval. Before 
their restoration they were no flatter than those at Lichfield, and it is a proof 
of the intrinsic excellence of their design that, notwithstanding the injury they 
have sustained, they still occupy the first rank amongst glass-paintings of the 
more powerful and effective class. The most striking is, perhaps, the second 
of the chapel windows from the east, the design of Bernard van Orley, prin- 
cipally on account of the varied and vigorous action of the groups. At a 
distance, however, it is less broad in effect than the fourth window from the 

H. — We hope that the projected annual exhibitions of " stained glass " at 
South Kensington may in course of time exercise a beneficial influence on the 
practice of glass-painting in this country. The present exhibition shows the de- 
ficiencies of our native artists, and how much they have to learn before they 
can compete successfully with foreign schools. "Whether a demand for painted 
windows of a high class will ever be created sufficient to induce our best artists 
to direct their attention to the subject, may be doubted. The praiseworthy 
efforts made at Glasgow and at St. Paul's Cathedral are, it is to be feared, 


efforts which for the present must necessarily be responded to by foreign artists 
who Lave devoted their attention to the finest examples of glass-painting. It 
cannot be supposed that a committee of management appointed by any body 
of subscribers will ever entertain the notion of educating a school of glass- 
painters. Their duty is simply to seek out and employ those whose works 
offer the best guarantee of ability to execute fresh commissions. Nor are they 
likely, if they have the interests of their constituents at heart, to submit to 
the guidance of any artist, however distinguished, who is wholly inexperienced 
in respect of glass-painting. The most important recent work, designed by a 
late eminent Royal Academician, demonstrates that glass-painting has con- 
ditions affecting the very nature of the composition, which must be thoroughly 
comprehended before a satisfactory result can be attained. 

Whilst the foregoing pages w T ere in the press, and had received the author's 
revision, the painful intelligence of his sudden decease has reached us. This 
sad event, full of anguish to those who best knew the excellent and amiable 
qualities of our lamented friend, claims our most hearty condolence. All who 
enjoyed his kindly intercourse, who were familiar with his generous disposition, 
his accomplished taste and attainments in a department of art which none had 
so successfully pursued as himself, will deeply deplore the loss of such a genial 
spirit. We must cherish the memory of the friend taken from us in the fresh 
energy of life, and of his wonted interest in our common pursuits — of one who 
ever was foremost in bygone years to impart the knowledge which he acquired, 
or to contribute to our gratification. 

From Lincoln Cathedral. 



(A Memoir read at the Annual Meeting of the Archaeological Institute at Warwick, 

July 26, 1864. 1 ) 

^WITHSTANDING the assistance afforded by 
Sir William Dugdale's account of the painted 
glass in the Beauchamp Chapel, its present shat- 
tered and dislocated state renders it a difficult 
task to re-arrange it, or to ascertain what parts 
occupy their original positions, or even to form a 
conjecture as to the nature of that which has 
been lost. Fortunately for our investigations, the 
glass hitherto has not been " restored," but only " repaired by 
some ignorant glazier," as the phrase is ; but such a person I 
have ever found to be less mischievous than even the most 
accomplished restorer. 

I will not make any long quotations from the documents of 
which Sir William Dugdale has furnished abstracts; but the 
following particulars will be found useful : — 

It appears by the will of Richard Earl of Warwick, whose 
executors built the chapel, and who was Lord Despencer in right 
of his second wife, 2 that he bequeathed an image of gold to the 
shrine in the church of St. Alban, to the honour of God, our 
Lady, and St. Alban ; another to the shrine of St. Thomas at 
Canterbury ; a third to the shrine at Bridlington, in Yorkshire ; 
and a fourth to the shrine in the church of St. Wenefride, at 

The contract for glazing the chapel windows was made in 1447 
by the Earl's executors with John Prudde, of Westminster, 
glazier. 3 

1 In the absence of the lamented a [See Note A, at the end of this 

author, this memoir was read, at his Memoir.] 

request, by his friend, the Rev. John 3 [See Note B, at the end of this 

Louis Petit. Memoir.] 


Sir William Dugclale adds that, after the windows were finished, 
the executors caused some alterations to be made, being some 
addition (not stated) for " Our Lady," and " scripture of the 
marriage of the Earl." 

The east window of the chapel, as the most prominent and 
striking object, naturally arrests our attention ; it will, however, 
assist our investigation of its contents, if we first take a brief 
survey of the side windows. For it will, I fear, be found, that 
the east window lias undergone the fate of most east windows, in 
having been made the receptacle of fragments collected from 
other windows. Indeed I may state my belief, that of the glazing 
of the east window, which at first sight appears so perfect, little 
else remains in its original position than the glass in the tracery 
lights, the four upper figures in the side lights, and the small 
fragments in the cuspidated heads of the three central lights. 
In the accompanying diagram the original portions still in situ 
are indicated by shading diagonally from right to left, and a 
piece which I believe also to be original, though somewhat dis- 
placed, is indicated by dotting, the spaces filled by glass inserted 
being left white. 

To begin with the side windows of the chapel : although the 
remnant of the ancient glazing of these windows is so scanty, 
there is enough to indicate the original composition. 

The same general design pervades the three windows on the 
north side of the chapel, and the first window from the east on 
the south side. 

The tracery lights of each window are filled with a choir of 
angels, and each of the lower lights was originally occupied by 
a single figure with a waving scroll above its head, which ascended 
into the cuspidated head of the light. Of these scrolls only the 
upper parts now remain ; but by the inscriptions on them it 
sufficiently appears that the figures were mostly prophets or 
patriarchs. Figures with the lower parts of such scrolls waving 
above and about their heads are to be seen in the east window. 
These, it can be shown, have been removed from some of the 
side windows. Indeed it can, I think, be proved, that two of 
the figures in the east window have been removed from the first 
window from the east on the north side, by the agreement of the 
inscriptions on the lower parts of the scrolls with what remains 
on the upper parts still continuing in the side window. 

The lower lights had no borders, but were filled with coloured 
grounds alternately red in one light and blue in the next. Each 
ground was ornamented with a foliaged pattern, and was divided 



Diagram of the East Window of the Beauciiamp Chapel, Warwick. 

The glazed portions shaded with diagonal lines from right to left indicate the original glass remaining in situ ; the portion 
dotted, marked L. 1, appears to be original glass misplaced. 


by a narrow ornamented band — interlaced like a fret — into a 
series of small compartments ; the red ground into lozenge- 
shaped compartments, the blue into square compartments, in 
which were placed alternately the founder's badges, viz., the 
white ragged staff, and the white bear with a yellow chain and 
muzzle. The figures and the scrolls were embedded in these 
grounds, and the figures were represented standing on brackets 
only, and not under canopies. 

The remains of the coloured grounds are found in the side 
lights, and are all in situ. They afford a means of identifying 
figures in the east window (which retain their grounds, and some- 
times their brackets also) with the lights in the side windows out 
of which they have been taken. 

The angels in the tracery lights of the first window from the 
east, both on the north and south sides, are engaged with musical 
instruments. They are placed on a blue ground powdered with 
yellow flaming stars. 

But the angels in the tracery heads of the two remaining 
windows on the north side, and, as it would seem from the appear- 
ance of the fragments, in the heads of the two opposite windows 
also, were furnished with scrolls inscribed with portions of the 
hymn supposed to be sung by the angels, and marked with 
appropriate notes of music adapted to some sort of instrument. 
These scrolls most resemble the leaves of a book, and they are 
arranged in such a manner as to present the inelegant appear- 
ance of a series of chevrons. 

The scrolls are preserved only in the middle window on the 
north side : the inscriptions on them relate to a festival in honour 
of the Virgin ; and the prophetic scrolls in the lower lights of 
the same window seem to have a general reference to the coming 
of Our Lord. 

A somewhat different arrangement is adopted in the lower 
lights of the middle window on the south side. They appear to 
have been filled with a "multitude of the heavenly host:" in 
some of the lights yellow rays dart upwards. The glazing in 
the lower lig-hts of the last window on the south side cannot be 
considered as original. 

We will now return to the east window. 

It will be the more regular course to commence with the 
tracery lights of this window. They are evidently designed with 
reference to some important sacred subject in the lower lights ; 
though we find in some of them (as well as in the heraldic 
grounds of the lower lights of the side windows already noticed) 


that strange admixture of objects of secular pomp and worldly 
vanity which usually characterizes the works that we are fond of 
attributing to " the piety of our ancestors " in the middle ages. 

The upper row of tracery lights (marked A in the diagram) 
is principally devoted to a display of the founder's motto, in 
allusion to his marriage with a lady who eventually became 
heiress to the great Despencer family. The whole of this motto, 
" Louey Spencer, tant que vivray," is repeated in each pair of 
lights ; one-half, " Louey Spencer " (i. e. praise Spencer), being 
written on a scroll in one light, and the remainder, " tant que 
vivray," on a scroll in the next. The lights otherwise have re- 
ference to the sacred nature of the general design. In the upper 
part of each light are represented clouds coloured in the lights 
alternately blue and red, and powdered with yellow flaming stars, 
from which clouds yellow rays descend, and are received on 
the red or blue foliaged ground, as the case may be, on which 
the scroll containing the motto is placed. Of the originality of 
this glass there can be no reasonable doubt. 

The next row of tracery lights (marked b in the diagram) is 
entirely of religious design. In each is represented, on a blue 
foliaged ground powdered with yellow flaming stars, a red seraph 
standing on a yellow wheel, and holding a scroll of the same 
character as the angelic scrolls in the side windows, on which is 
set forth a portion of the " Gloria in excelsis," with musical 
notes. The hymn commences on the left hand or north side of 
the central part of the window, and continues across the six 
central tracery lights. It recommences on the left hand, or north 
side of the window, and continues across the four north tracery 
lights ; it again recommences in the left-hand light of the south 
side of the window, and terminates with that series. The adap- 
tation of the hymn to the number of lights, and the occurrence 
of the blue ground with flaming stars, afford a proof that the 
glass in this tier of lights is also original. 

The glass in the two quatrefoils (marked c in the diagram) 
may also be considered as original. Each quatrefoil was originally 
occupied by a cherub, coloured yellow, on a blue foliaged ground. 
Of the remaining tracery lights the larger ones are filled with 
the blue ground and yellow flaming stars, and the smaller ones, 
mere holes, with plain pieces of red or blue glass. There is no 
reason for questioning their originality. 

We can have no difficulty in concluding that the four figures 
in the upper part of the lower lights on the sides of the window 
(which are marked d, e, f, g, in the diagram) are also original 


and in situ ; for it abundantly appears that these figures represent 
the four saints in whose honour the Earl bequeathed the golden 
images mentioned in his will. 

The first in order on the north side of the window (marked d 
in the diagram) is that of an archbishop, as indicated by his cross- 
staff. The inscription formerly on the bracket supporting the 
figure (the figures never had any canopies) is now lost; but Sir 
William Dugdale, in his notice of the east window, states that 
there were in his time, " besides those costly portraitures in glass 
of Earl Eichard, with his wives and children " (of which we shall 
hear more presently), " the pictures, in their full proportion, of 
St. Alban, the protomartyr of England ; St. Thomas of Canter- 
bury; St. John of Bridlington; and of St. Wenefride." The 
figure in question may, therefore, be considered to represent St. 
Thomas of Canterbury. 

The second figure from the north (marked e in the diagram), 
representing a king in royal apparel, armed in plate, having a 
blue surcoat with a yellow saltire, and bearing in his hand a 
cross, is at once identified with Dugdale's description by " Scs 
Alb ... ." (Sanctus Albanus), the remains of the words inscribed 
on the bracket supporting the figure. 

The third figure from the north (in the south wing of the 
window, and marked f in the diagram) is that of a female saint, 
in a slate-coloured purple mantle (black is hereby indicated, but 
Prudde was mindful of his covenant not to use black glass if he 
could avoid it) having a jewelled border, and in a similarly- 
coloured under-dress, and bearing a pastoral staff. This is also 
identified with Dugdale's description by the word " . . . . Wene- 
frede " remaining on the bracket which supports the figure. 

The fourth figure (marked G in the diagram) we may rea- 
sonably conclude represents St. John of Bridlington, though the 
name on the bracket has been lost. It is that of a male saint, 
bald-headed, in a slate-coloured purple cope and white surplice, 
and holding a pastoral staff. In scale and general character it 
entirely accords with the other three figures. 

The figures of St. Thomas and St. John are on red grounds ; 
those of St. Alban and St. Wenefride are on blue ; each ground 
being divided into compartments and ornamented with the 
founder's badges, the bear and the ragged staff, like the grounds 
in the side windows. The order of the arrangement of the 
colours of these grounds — red, blue, blue, red — is a strong proof 
not only that the figures are in situ, but also of the originality of 
the glass which occupies the cuspidated heads of the three central 


lower lights. For it will be found, that of these three lights the 
two outer ones had red grounds, and the inner or central light an 
exterior blue ground — an arrangement which would produce an 
alternation of red and blue grounds across the lower lights of the 
window thus : — 

| Eed | Blue || Red | Blue | Red || Blue | Red | 

The glass in the cuspidated heads of the three central lower 
lights would appear to have belonged to some large subject. It 
seems to have immediate reference to some design which con- 
sisted of three glorified figures, the centre one of which was 
either larger than the others or was raised above them. For the 
glass in the centre light (marked I in the diagram) represents 
the upper part of a nimbus (not cruciferous, as far as I could 
ascertain), from which yellow rays proceed, and extend over a 
red ground next the nimbus and over a blue ground beyond ; 
which blue ground occupies the remainder of the space as far as 
the stonework will allow. This blue ground is painted to repre- 
sent clouds, and is powdered with yellow flaming stars. 

The glass in the two outer central lights (marked h and k in 
the diagram) represents only yellow rays traversing a red ground, 
and these rays, it is evident from their less divergence as compared 
with those in the centre light, proceeded from some point lower 
down in each lijjht than the nimbus in the middle light. 

We probably should conjecture rightly if we supposed that the 
subject of which these fragments formed part consisted of some 
prominent piece of Marian symbolism. The chapel is dedicated 
to the Blessed Virgin ; and she was one of the holy persons 
intended to be honoured by the Earl's bequest of a golden image 
to the shrine of St. Alban. But, in order to ascertain Avhether 
any other portions of the glass now in the window belonged to 
such a subject, a consideration of the space which it may be 
supposed to have occupied becomes necessary; and in this we 
must particularly attend to what Sir William Dugdale says as to 
the state of the window in his time. 

In his ' Antiquities of Warwickshire ' there is an engraving of 
eight kneeling figures, the portraits, as appears from the inscrip- 
tions which accompany them, of Earl Richard, the founder ; of 
his first Countess, Elizabeth, and her three daughters, Margaret, 
Eleanor, and Elizabeth ; and of his second Countess, Isabella, 
and her two children, Henry, first Duke of Warwick, and the 
Lady Anne. Among these inscriptions we may recognise the 
" scripture of the marriage of the Earl," added by the Earl's 
executors after the completion of the windows. 


These portraits are arranged on the page in three rows — the 
upper one consisting of the effigy of the Earl between those of 
his two wives. But this arrangement, though the most conve- 
nient for the engraver, we may be certain was not the arrange- 
ment of the figures in the window. All analogy points to the 
conclusion that these portraits were placed in the window in a 
single row — a supposition which, indeed, is strengthened by the 
attitudes of the figures in the engraving. The Earl, who is 
represented in profile, looks towards the spectator's left, which, 
if the figure were in the window, would in reality be facing 
the north. His first Countess and her three daughters look in the 
same direction as the Earl ; whilst the second Countess faces 
the Earl, and consequently would look towards the south, to which 
point also her son and daughter turn. So that, if the figures are 
supposed to be in the window, and there placed in a single row, 
the Earl, his first Countess, and her three daughters would look 
towards the north, and face his second Countess, her son and 
daughter, who would look towards the south. 

The difficulty is to determine whether these figures were 
arranged in a row which continued uninterruptedly across the 
whole window, or which Avas divided into two portions and 
confined to the outer lights, under the figures of St. Thomas, 
St. Alban, St. Wenefride, and St. John. 

Of course, if our opinion should be in favour of the continuity 
of the row, the space to be allotted to the central subject will, as 
a necessary result, be greatly diminished. 

If we could, with absolute certainty, identify the figure in the 
lower part of the middle light of the window (marked L 1 in 
the diagram) with the effigy of the founder delineated in the 
engraving given by Dugdale, its size, coupled with the appear- 
ance of the engraved figures, might solve the question. For the 
figure in the window, with its tent-like canopy of state of which 
the remains exist, is on a scale sufficient to occupy the entire 
breadth of the light. Such dimensions must have given rise to 
great crowding of the figures, if we suppose that they were all 
upon the same scale and were confined to the four lights in the 
wings of the window. That they were of the same size, appears 
from the engraving which is given by Dugdale ; and all analogy 
would confirm that supposition, for the son and daughters were 
grown persons when the glass was put up. And that the figures 
were not so greatly crowded together as must have been the case 
had they been confined to four lights, also appears from the 


engraving, where each figure is represented separately, and with 
the whole of its heraldry shown ; which the engraver could hardly 
have supplied had they very much overlapped each other. I 
say, had they very much overlapped each other, because, even 
according to the theory of a continuous row, two of the Earl's 
daughters by his first wife must have occupied one light ; but, 
according to the contrary theory, five figures on one side of the 
window at least must have been crowded into two lights. I think 
that it is more probable that the figures were disposed in a con- 
tinuous row which extended across the entire window, and that 
the founder was placed in the middle light, his Countesses in the 
lights on each side, his three daughters by his first wife in the two 
south outer lights, and his son and daughter by his second wife 
in the corresponding lights on the north side. It is probable 
that the canopies of state in the three middle lights were a little 
taller than those in the outer lights ; and if the theory of a con- 
tinuous row of figures is correct, we may reasonably conclude 
that the effigies occupied in the centre lights the spaces marked 
in the diagram l 1 and 2, M 1, 2, and 3, and n ; and in the side 
lights the spaces marked o 1 and 2, P, Q, and it, immediately 
under the figures of St. Thomas, St. Alban, St. Wenefride, and 
St. John ; which would leave, as the space available for the prin- 
cipal subject, that marked in the diagram s 1 and 2, t 1 and 2, 
and u 1 and 2. 

The difficulty felt in identifying the existing figure in the 
middle light with the engraving of the founder's effigy arises 
from a discrepancy in the heraldry on the dresses of the two 
figures. The arms represented on this figure in the engraving 
given by Dugdale are the quartered coat of Beauchamp and 
Newburgh. Those on the figure in the window consist of the 
same coat with an inescutcheon of pretence of Despencer. 
The latter arms would no doubt be the Earl's' proper coat after 
his second wife became heiress of the Despencer family ; and I 
can account for the discrepancy only by supposing, either that 
the figure in the window belongs to another series of effigies in the 
chapel, which is improbable both from Sir William Dugdale's 
silence and the absence of any allusion to the founder in the 
tracery of the side windows, or else that the engraver by accident 
omitted the Despencer inescutcheon. Sir William Dugdale has 
left no description of the arms in addition to the engravings ; 
and there is this circumstance which seems to impugn the en- 
graver's accuracy, that in the plate the Despencer inescutcheon 


(omitted in the Earl's arms) is made to appear in the arms of 
the Lady Eleanor, the second daughter of the Earl's first wife, 
who was heiress of Lord Berkeley, as well as (properly) in the 
arms of the Lady Anne, daughter of the Earl's second wife, who 
was ultimately heiress of the Despencer family. The figure, 
which is much mutilated, is turned, like that in the engraving, 
towards the north, and has evidently been placed under a canopy 
of state. The head of the figure is lost, and has been replaced 
by that of a lady, perhaps one of the female effigies. The canopy 
has lost its upper part, and the whole subject has been thrust 
upwards above its proper position in the window. 

With the exception of two subjects which I shall presently 
notice, I think that we shall have no difficulty in concluding 
that of the remainder of the glass in the window none formed 
part of the original design ; and that, with regard to these two 
subjects, strong grounds may be adduced for the belief that they 
have been removed from some other windows in this chapel. 

To commence with the three lower centre lights of the window : 
the subject in the north light (marked s 1 in the diagram) is the 
upper part of the figure of St. Elizabeth. On the portion of 
the scroll which remains above the head of the figure is part 
of the forty-third verse of the first chapter of St. Luke's Gospel ; 
and the residue of the scroll with the remainder of the verse is, 
I think, in the cuspidated head of the next light but one to 
the east of the first window from the east on the north side of the 
chapel. This glass is an insertion. What at first appears to be 
the lower part of the saint (marked s 2 in the diagram) is, in 
fact, the lower part and feet of another figure on a larger scale 
than was that of St. Elizabeth, and probably the remains of the 
figure of a prophet or patriarch. Another ground for concluding 
that the glass in question is an insertion consists in the fact, that 
the nimbus is plain and not radiated, and that the red background 
to the figure, instead of being plain red, like that in the cuspi- 
dated head of the light, is reticulated and ornamented with the 
bear and the ragged staff. 

The subject in the south light (marked u 1 in the diagram) is 
the upper part of the figure of the Blessed Virgin. On the 
portion of the scroll which remains above the head of the figure 
is part of the forty-eighth verse of the first chapter of St. Luke ; 
and the residue of the scroll with the remainder of the verse is, I 
think, in the cuspidated head of the light nearest the east of the 
same window on the north side of the chapel to which the figure 


of St. Elizabeth belonged, and from which this figure also must 
have been taken. Another ground for concluding that it is an 
insertion in the east window consists in the fact, that its back- 
ground is not red, like the ground in the cuspidated head of the 
light above, but blue ; and moreover it is reticulated and orna- 
mented with the founder's badges : both which features would be 
correct if this figure stood, as I have supposed, next to that of 
St. Margaret in the window on the north side of the chapel. 
What appears to be the lower part and feet of this figure (and 
occupies the space marked u 2 in the diagram) really belongs to 
a different figure ; which last, from the inscription on a scroll at 
the bottom of the bracket beneath, appears to be that of the 
prophet Amos. 

The subject in the middle light (marked t 1 in the diagram) 
is the upper part of the figure of a prophet or patriarch. The 
figure holds a small scroll rolled up, to which allusion is made in 
the inscription " . . . . non aperietur " on the scroll which 
waves above the head of the figure. It is clearly an insertion : 
the ground is blue ornamented with the founder's badges. The 
lower part or feet (marked T 2) in the diagram belong to another 
figure, which appears from the inscription of the bracket to have 
been that of the prophet Isaiah. 

The two subjects concerning which I think the greatest diffi- 
culties must be felt to exist are the following. It will be most 
convenient to commence with that in the lower part of the 
southern central light (which is marked n in the diagram). 

The subject here represented is the Blessed Virgin. She is 
kneeling, and turned towards the north side of the window. 
The hands are crossed upon her breast ; the eyes and counte- 
nance are downcast. Above the head of the figure is a red 
cloud, from which yellow rays diverge, spreading themselves over 
a blue ground powdered with yellow flaming stars, down to the 
shoulders of the figure. It is habited in a mantle and close-fittinc; 
under-garment, the upper part or body of which is richly jewelled, 
and the lower part or skirt is purple, powdered with small 
roundels, each representing yellow rays issuing from a blue 
cloud. The nimbus is red. This figure, which is of a larger 
size than any of the four original figures in the window, but is 
on the same scale as the figures of some prophets or patriarchs 
in the lower part of the window, which clearly have belonged to 
some of the side windows, may, from its appearance, have formed 
part of the subject of the Annunciation, or of the Coronation of 


the Blessed Virgin. If the latter, we might be inclined to think we had at last discovered some part of the subject which 
occupied the upper portion of the central lights. 

But the space required for the representation of a Coronation 
of the Virgin, on such a scale as the size of the present figure 
would demand, would greatly exceed the limits necessarily pre- 
scribed by the adoption of the theory of a continuous row of effigies 
across the window. Though I fully admit the difficulties which 
surround the subject in whatever light it is regarded, I think 
that, upon the whole, it is less easy to conceive that this figure 
formed part of the missing central subject, than that it belonged 
to one of the side windows of the chapel. 

In the most northern of the central lights (at the spot marked 
m 1 in the diagram) is a head of Christ crowned with thorns and 
surrounded with a cruciferous nimbus. The countenance, which 
is turned towards the south, looks downwards. The scale of this 
head is the same as that of the last-mentioned figure. Whether 
this head was originally on a blue background traversed with 
yellow diverging rays, I am unable to say ; but, on a close 
inspection, it appears that the blue ground we now see is 
made up of fragments of glass once used for draperies, and 
that the greater part, at all events, of the existing yellow rays 
has been cut from fragments of yellow glass originally used 
for other purposes. This modern work may have been done in 
repairing an original design, and it may have been devised with 
the intention of producing an effect in conformity with that of 
the radiated ground above the figure of the Virgin in the 
opposite light. 

The remains of a figure, which are just beneath this head (and 
occupy the space marked m 2 in the diagram), appear not to 
have belonged to the head in question. About the shoulders 
there is a portion of background, red, diapered, and powdered 
with yellow flaming stars. The background to the remaining 
portion of the figure is blue, divided into small squares, and 
ornamented with the founder's badges. The rest of the light 
(marked M 3 in the diagram) is filled with remains of a third 

My impression is that the head of Christ belonged to one of 
the side windows, as well as the rest of the glass, with the excep- 
tion perhaps of the fragment of the red background, which is 
powdered with yellow stars. This, indeed, may have belonged 
to the upper part of the middle light. 



There seems to be no difficulty in supposing that the remainder 
of the glass does not belong to the east window. 

The space below the kneeling figure of the Earl (marked L 2 
iu the diagram) is filled with fragments, amongst which is a 
portion of foliage with red fruit intermixed, which may have 
belonged to a painting of the Temptation of our first parents — 
if there were such a subject — in any one of the side windows. 

To proceed to the glass in the lower parts of the outer lights : 
that immediately below the figure of St. Thomas (in the space 
marked o 1 in the diagram) consists of the upper portion of the 
figure of a patriarch or prophet. This figure is on the same 
scale as that of the Virgin and the head of Christ in the spaces 
marked N and M 1 in the diagram. It is evidently too large for 
the place it occupies, for, if complete, it would extend about one- 
fourth of its length below the sill of the window. There can, 
therefore, be no reasonable doubt that this glass belonged to one 
of the side windows. Above the head of the figure is a wavy 
scroll, in this instance complete, but without any inscription. 
The background is red divided into lozenges, and ornamented 
with the founder's badges. What appears to be the lower part 
of the figure (and occupies the space marked o 2 in the diagram) 
is, in fact, a portion of another. 

The subject which occupies the next light (in the space marked 
p in the diagram) is the upper portion of a prophet, as appears 
from the part of the scroll that remains above its head, and the 
inscription upon it. It is evident that this figure is not in situ, 
it being too large for the place. If completed by the addition 
of its lower part and feet, the figure would reach below the sill of 
the window to a distance equal to one-fourth the height of the 
figure. It is upon a blue ground divided into squares, and orna- 
mented with the founder's badges. Without doubt it belonged 
to one of the side windows. 

On the south side of the window the lower part of the light 
(marked Q in the diagram) is filled with fragments, consisting 
principally of the remains of two figures, each on such a scale as 
would render them, if completed, about one-fourth too long for 
the light. We may therefore conclude that they belonged to 
one of the side windows. The ground is red divided into squares, 
and ornamented with the founder's badges. 

The remaining part of the window (marked R in the diagram) 
is occupied with a portion of the figure of a prophet or patriarch, 
which, if completed by the addition of its lower part and feet, 


would, like the others, be too tall for the light, It may there- 
fore be considered to have been removed from one of the side 
windows. The background is red divided into lozenges, anil 
ornamented with the founder's badges. 

Such is the best account that I have been able to furnish of 
these most interesting windows. It is unavoidably dry and 
technical, and possibly some of the positions which I have ad- 
vanced will not meet with ready acceptance. I shall, however, 
be sufficiently repaid for the pains I have taken if my survey of 
the glass should in any degree facilitate the labours of others. 

In conclusion I will add a few observations on the general 
character of the glazing. 

In the contract with the Earl's executors, John Prudde, the 
glazier, amongst other things, undertook to employ no English 
glass, but to glaze all the windows with the best foreign glass 
that was procurable in England ; to use the best colours, and as 
little white, green, and black glass as possible. Designs on paper 
were to be delivered to him by the executors, which were to be 
fresh traced and pictured in rich colours by another painter at 
Prudde's expense, from which the glass-paintings were to be 
executed. The whole cost of painting and fixing was to be at 
the rate of 2s. per superficial foot, which would be equal to about 
11. 4s. present money. 

I imagine that the use of foreign glass at this period was not 
unfrequent, For I cannot perceive that the material used in 
these windows differs in texture or tone from much other glazing 
of the same date with which I am familiar. The small effect 
that the weather has had on it proves it to be a very hard kind 
of glass ; but glass of an equally hard nature and of the same 
date may be seen elsewhere. Nor is there anything remarkable 
in the quality of the colours. Prudde, indeed, seems to have 
been a man of sounder taste than his employers ; for, notwith- 
standing their objection to the use of white and of green glass, 
he seems to have used each colour without stint. In point of 
general execution his work is a very good average specimen of 
the period. It is brilliant, rich, harmonious, and solid, and as 
flat and confused as the contemporary glass-paintings and paint- 
ings in oil or water-colour always are. To have been otherwise 
at that time would have been impossible ; for the art of producing 
relief in any kind of painting was then unknown ; its discovery 
was reserved for a later period. Once known, the practice was 
adopted with equal eagerness by the artists in glass-painting, and 

z 2 


by the artists who worked in oil or water-colour ; and during the 
period when modern art touched perfection, the different means 
of representation were each faithfully worked out according to 
its own peculiar laws. In Prudde's work we recognise the 
influence which the general art of his period exercised on his 
own, just as we see in the next century the glass-paintings 
influenced by the progress of the Kenaissance. It is surprising 
to me that persons should ever fall into the error of supposing 
that there is any necessary or scientific connection between glass- 
painting, which look as if they had been " ironed out flat," and 
Gothic architecture. Flatness was the fault of the art of repre- 
sentation in painting generally in Prudde's time. The flatness 
of his own work is evidently the result of his ignorance of a better 
method, and not of intention. 

The members of the Institute will have an opportunity on their 
visit to Lichfield of comparing the effect of these glass-paintings 
with that of glass-paintings about one hundred years later. I 
shall not anticipate their judgment by any remarks. I will 
only recommend them to prepare themselves for the occasion 
by studying the example under consideration, and noting its 
defects as well as its merits. If the state of modern glass- 
painting in England is deplorable, as an examination of the 
specimens now exhibited at South Kensington abundantly proves 
it to be, we should remember that the fault lies rather with the 
patrons of the art than with its professors. A general truth is 
involved in the verse — 

" The Drama's laws the Drama's patrons give." 

%* The correction of this Memoir and its preparation for the 
press were among the last labours of the lamented author, of 
whom a sudden and unforeseen stroke has deprived us. Though 
a learned, careful, sound, and acute archaeologist in many 
branches of the science, he was best known from his studies in 
the art of glass-painting, in regard to which his reputation was 
European. Of this art he not only investigated and illustrated 
the history and principles, but endeavoured, we may hope with 
some success, to restore it, not in a spirit of mere imitation, but 
as a living and progressive art, and to raise its standard to a 
level with those acknowledged by artists both in painting and in 
sculpture. Much remained for him to do had he been spared 
longer ; but he has laid a foundation on which others may 


securely build. With his refined taste and sound judgment was 
combined a technical knowledge, not merely of the treatment 
but of the actual manufacture of the material. His drawings of 
glass-paintings are unique. In character and expression, force, 
truth, purity, and brilliance of colour, as well as in the represen- 
tation of the texture of the glass, they are unparalleled. They 
are, in fact, as perfect fac-similes of the originals as can be pro- 
duced by water-colour upon paper. 

J. L. P. 

A. — Richard Earl of Warwick, who founded the Beauchamp chapel, in 
which he was interred, and died 30th April, 1439, was son and heir of Thomas 
Earl of Warwick, by Margaret daughter of William Lord Ferrers of Groby. 
He married, first, Elizabeth daughter and heiress of Thomas Lord Berkeley, 
by whom be left three daughters : Margaret, who was the wife of the famous 
John Talbot Earl of Shrewsbury ; Eleanor, who married first Thomas Lord 
Boos, and secondly Edmund Beaufort Marquis of Dorset and Duke of Somer- 
set ; and Elizabeth, who married George Nevil Lord Latimer. This Earl 
married, secondly, Isabel daughter of Thomas le Despencer Earl of Gloucester, 
who, by the death of her brother Richard and her elder sister Elizabeth without 
issue, became sole heir to her father. This Isabel was the widow of Richard 
Beauchamp Earl of Worcester, the cousin of the Earl, who had a special dis- 
pensation from the Pope to marry her. By her he left issue Henry his son 
and heir, afterwards Duke of Warwick, and one daughter, Anne, who became 
the wife of Sir Richard Nevil. 

B.— An abstract of the covenants between the executors of the Earl and the 
several artists employed in the erection and decoration of the chapel and tomb 
is given by Dugdale, ' Antiquities of Warwickshire,' edit. 1656, of which the 
following is an extract, so far as relates to the glass : — " John Prudde, of West- 
minster, glasier, 23 Junii, 25 H. 6, covenanteth, &c, to glase all the windows 
in the new Chappell in Warwick with Glasse beyond the Seas, and with no 
Glasse. of England ; and that in the finest wise, with the best, cleanest, and 
strongest Glasse of beyond the Sea that may be had in England, and of the 
finest colours of blew, yellow, red, purpure, sanguine, and violet, and of all 
other colours that shall be most necessary and best to make rich and embellish 
the matters, Images, and stories that shall be delivered and appointed by the 
said Executors by patterns in paper, afterwards to be newly traced and pictured 
by another Painter in rich colour at the charges of the said Glasier : All which 
proportions the said John Prudde must make perfectly to fine, glase, eneylin it, 
aud finely and strongly set it in lead and souder, as well as any Glasse as in 
England. Of white Glasse, green Glasse, black Glasse, he shall put in as little 
as shall be needfull for the shewing and setting forth of the matters, Images, 
and storyes. And the said Glasier shall take charge of the same Glasse, 
wrought and to be brought to Warwick, and set up there, in the windows of 
the said Chapell ; the Executors paying to the said Glasier for every foot of 
Glasse ii.s., and so for the whole xci.H. is. x.d. 

" It appeareth that, after these windows were so finished, the executors 
devised some alterations, as to adde for our Lady, and scripture of 


the marriage of the Earle, and procured the same to be set forth in Glasse 
in most fine and curious colours ; and for the same they payd the sum of vi.s. iv.d. Also it appeareth that they caused the windows in the vestry 
to be curiously glased with Glasse of ii.s. a foot, for which they payd l.s. 
The sum totall for the Glass of the said Vestry and Chappell, xviii.s. vi.d., 
which in all contain by measure : 

" The East window, cxlix. foot, i. quarter, and two inches. 

" The South windows ccccclx. foot, xi. inches. 

" The North windows cccv. foot. 

" The totall dccccx. foot, iii. quarters of a foot, aud two inches." 

From St. Mary's Redcliffe, Hristol. 






Arms, Archbishop Warham, 
impaled with those of the See. 2 

Arms, King Henry VII. 

Arms, Merchant Venturers . . 

Arms, Bathurst impaling Ran- 

Crest, Bathurst 

Archbishop, supposed to be 
Archbishop Simon de Meop- 

Royal badges 


Arms of the Bowes family . . 

Arms of the Butler family . . 

Archbishop with the pall 

Archbishop • .. 



Agnus Dei (redrawn, No. 409) 

Arms, Prince Arthur 

Arms of the Busket family, 
quartered with Fitzjames. 

Badge, Dawbeny 

Arms, Bishop Fitzjames, im- 
paled by Newborough of 
Lul worth, Dorset. 

Lambeth Palace 


Franks House, Horton Kirby, Kent 

Farningham Church, Kent 
Meopham Church, Kent 

North Cray Church, Kent .. 
North Cray Church, Kent, and 

Shoreham Church, Sussex. 
North Cray Church, Kent . . 
Lullingstone Church, Kent .. 



North Cray Church, Kent . . 


Newick Church, Sussex 
North Cray Church, Kent . . 
Fulham Palace 










1 The drawings were exhibited by the 
Archaeological Institute, at the rooms 
of the Arundel Society in Old Bond 
Street, from March 24th to April 5th, 
1865. They are at present temporarily 
deposited at the South Kensington 
Museum for public exhibition. 

The present catalogue is taken from a 
copy of a MS. catalogue in Mr. Winston's 
handwriting, but with some additions, 
giving fuller descriptions of the draw- 
ings, from the printed catalogue used 
at the exhibition in Old Bond Street. 
The dates are by Mr. Winston ; latterly 
he ceased to assign any. 

2 These arms were not originally at 

Lambeth, but most probably at the 
Archbishop's palace at Otford, near 
Sevenoaks, the ruins of which still 
remain. The Rev. Benjamin Winston 
purchased the glass at Sevenoaks about 
the year 1830, and, on the restoration of 
Lambeth Palace by Archbishop Hov, lev, 
made a present of it to him. The Arch- 
bishop then requested him, if lie met 
with any more such glass, to purchase it 
for him. Mr. Winston accordingly pur- 
chased for him, also at Sevenoaks, the 
arms of Henry VII., the subject of the 
next drawing. Mr. Charles Winston's 
drawing of Warham's arms bears date 
December, 1830. 



Where situate, or Owner's Name. 













Arras, Kinj? Henry VIII. 
. / Cardinal Kemp . . \ 

Arms, j Bi8llop s ava ge ../ 

( Bishop Savage . . "1 
\ Bishop Fitzjames . . / 

Bird .. 

Arms of the Bathurst family 

Virgin and Child 


Border of fish 

Emblem of the Holy Trinity 

Arms, Duke of Lancaster 

Arms, Duke of York 

Arms, Duke of Gloucester . . 

Lion's head 


1 and 2, Resim-eetion of Christ 

Anns of England 

Arms of France 


Emblem of Holy Trinity 


St. Peter 

Circular ornament 



Emblem of St. John the Evan- 



St. Anno 

St. Anne 


1 and 2, arms of the Bohuns, 
Earls of Hereford. 

Grotesque animal 




Circular ornament 



Circular ornament 

Christ enthroned 


Arms, Bishop Tunstall 
Emblem of St. Mark 
Arms, Queen Elizabeth 
Arms of Mortimer Earl of 

Arms of Sir John Pusy 
Arms, Beauchamp Bishop of 

Arms of the Browne family . . 

Fulhara Palace 
Ditto .. .. 

Church, Northampton- 


Eynesford, Kent 

Parningham Church, Kent .. 
Kingsdown Church, Keut . . 



Wanlip Church, Leicestershire 




Eothley Church, Leicestershire 














Fawkham Church, Kent 

Ditto s 

Stanford Church, Northampton- 























68 | Crest of the Browne family 

69 Ornament 

70 Patriarch 

Ditto 1335 

Ditto 1335 

Ditto 1335 

Ditto ,. 1335 

Thaxted Church, Essex .. .. 1490 

Ditto 1490 

Ditto 1490 

Ditto 1490 

Kingsdown Church, Kent .. .. 1310 

Southwell Minster, Notts .. .. 1230 

Fulham Palace 1525 

Wrotham Church, Kent .. .. 1320 

Franks House, Horton Kirby, Kent 1594 

Ockwells House, Berks . . . . 1455 

Ditto 1455 

Ditto 1455 

Reynolds Place, Horton Kirby, 1514 

Ditto 1514 

Halstead Church, Essex .. .. 1345 

Great Dunmow Church, Essex .. 1460 





















Arms, Duresme of Essex 
Arms of the Bourchier family 
A martyrdom 

The Ascension 


Arms of the Poix family 
Arms. Feche impaling Scrope 

and Tiptoft, quarterly. 
Arms, " Brockhull." 
Group of figures 


Flight into Egypt 

Borders and quarries 

1 and 2, pattern 

Grotesque animal 


Arms, Berkeley 





Two circles 

Bishop, 1 and 2 


Arms of the Sackville family 
Arms of the Poinings family 
York and Lancaster Kose . . 
Circular ornament 

Circle (small) 



Arms, Earl of Lancaster and 
Earl of Richmond. 

Lion's head 

A martyr, St. Stephen 

Murder of the Innocents 




1 and 2 pattern 



Lion's head 


St. Peter 

St. Paul 


An archbishop 


Consecration of a bishop 

Great Dunmow Church, Essex .. 
Halstead Church, Essex 
Jerusalem Chamber, Westminster 


Farningham Church, Kent 

T. P. Cox, Esq 

Lullingstone Church, Kent 


Belonged to the late Lord Herbert 
of Lea, probably from the Sainte 
Chapelle, Paris. 



Mr. Ward, C. W 

Chartham Church, Kent 


Mr. Ward 

Westonbirt Church, Gloucester- 


Ditto .. ., 



Merton Chapel, Oxford . . 

Germau glass, belonged to the late 
Lord Herbert of Lea. 

Farningham Church, Kent 

Shalford Church, Essex 


Mr. Ward 

French glass, belonged to the late 
Lord Herbert of Lea. 

Netteswell Church, Essex 



Chartham Church, Kent 

Merton Chapel, Oxford 

French glass, lato Lord Herbert 

of Lea. 
Jerusalem Chamber, Westminster 


From Cologne 




German glass, late Lord Herbert 

of Lea. 

Salisbury Cathedral 

Woodmansterne Church, Surrey . . 





Dorchester Church, Oxfordshire . . 










































Where situate, or Owner's Name. 

Pattern and canopy 



Fragment of border to arms . . 


Badge, Prince Edward 
Part of the Crucifixion 


Figure of Christ, tracery light 
Tracery light, pattern 
Tracery light, pattern 
Head of tracery light 
Tracery light, pattern 
Tracery light, remains of 


Tracery light, pattern 

Fragment of border 


1 and 2, part of Tree of Jesse 



Arms, England 

Tracery light, angel 

Ditto, Christ and emblems . . 

Ditto, nondescript beast 

Ditto, arms, Clare 

Ditto, ornament 

Ditto, ornament 

Head of a tracery light 
Head and one panel of tracery 

Tracery light, pattern .. 

Tracery light, pattern .. 

Head of a tracery light, pat- 
Nondescript animal 

Tracery light 

Tracery light, figure 
Lower light, figure, &c. 
Lion's head and border 



Head of lower light 
Tracery light, lion's head 

Ditto, work 



Fragment of arms, England 
Fragment of border 
Fragment of border and quarry 
Tracery light, pattern 

Southfleet Church, Kent 


Bothley Church, Leicestershire, and 
Mr. Ward. 

Mr. Miller 


Horton Kirby, Kent 

Mr. Ward 

St. Martin's-le-Grand Church, York 


Southfleet Church, Kent 








Mr. Hilliers, Boley Hill, Kochester, 

Westwell Church, Kent 


Chartham Church, Kent 















Snodland Church, Kent 













Sutton-at-Hone Church, Kent .. 



























Two female heads 

Tracery light, pattern 

Lower light and arms (France) 

Figure and canopy 

Lower light, arms (Clare) .. 

Head of lower light 



Tracery light 

1 and 2, figure and canopy . . 



Marriage in Cana of Galilee 

Consecration of a church 


Head of Christ 

Lower light, pattern 

Figure and canopy. On the 
scroll is written, " Magister 
Henricus de Mansfield me 

Female figure 


Head of St. James 
Tracery light, figure 

Circle, figures. On the scroll is 
written, " If ani man thirst, 
come to me and drinck." 

Quarry (Peche) 


Female head 

Male head 

Tracery lights 

Tracery light 

Tracery lights 


Fragments and two tracery 


Three quarries 

Angel and harp 

St. James and canopy 


A window head. On scroll 
" Ecce Aguus Dei." 



Border, &c 






Where situate, or Owner's Name. 


Thaxted Church, Essex 

Sible Hedingham Church, Essex 

Selling Church, Kent 







French glass, belonged to the late 

Lord Herbert of Lea. 

0. W 

French glass, belonged to the late 

Lord Herbert of Lee. 





Merton College Chapel, Oxford . . 

German glass, belonged to the late 

Lord Herbert of Lea. 

French glass, ditto 

Stowting Church, Kent 
Belonged to the late Lord Herbert 

of Lea. 
Lullingstone Church, Kent 


Belonged to late Lord Herbert of 

Worfield Church, Salop 
Ditto .. .. 

Worfield Church, Salop 

French glass, belonged to late Lord 

Herbert of Lea. 
Burleigh House and Mr. Ward . . 
German glass, belonged to late Lord 

Herbert of Lea. 
Stanton Harcourt Church, Oxon . . 

Merton College Library, Oxford . . 


Ditto .. .. 

Kingsdown Church, Kent 
Wichfont Church, Wilts . . 



Westminster Abbey 

Worfield Church, Salop .. .. 






224 Inscription 

225 Tracery light . . . . . . 

226 Prince Arthur 

The Princess Elizabeth of 
York, afterwards Queen 
of Henry VII., and her 

228 Tracery light 

229 Arms of Queen Mary and 
Philip of Spain. 

230 Crown 

231 Figure of a saint 

232 Anns of England 

233 "Virgin and Child 

234 Part of canopy 

235 Ditto and part of figure 

236 Ditto and part of figure 

237 Kneeling figures 

238 Kneeling figures 

239 Head of a window canopy . . 

240 SS. Catherine and Margaret . . 

241 Rose, tracery light 

242 Kose, tracery light 

243 St. Magdalene 

244 St. Sitha 

246 Arms of Margaret Countess 

of Buren, a.d. 1534-1539. 

247 Head of window 

248 Circular ornament 

249 Border 

250 Quarries, &c 

251 Part of canopy 

252 Part of canopy 

253 Tracery light" 

254 Tracery light 

255 Tracery light 

256 Swiss glass 

257 Shield 

258 Tracery light 

259 Head (David) 

260 Border 

261 Border 

262 Quarry 

263 Pattern on drapery 

264 Border 

265 Arms, Cardinal Beaufort 

266 Border 

267 Emblem of Virgin Mary 

268 Quarries 

268a Quarry 

269 Border 

270 Fragments 

271 Hand 

272 Quarries 

273 Pattern 

Where situate, or Owner's Name. 


Little Malvern Church, Worcester- 

Kingsdown Church, Kent .. 

Little Malvern Church, Worcester- 


Dennington Church, Suffolk 
Wilton House, Wilts . . . 


Selling Church, Kent 



Stowting Church, Kent 

Ditto .. 




Mells Church, Somersetshire 







Lichfield Cathedral 

Acton Church, Staffordsliire 


Norbury Church, Derbyshire 


Mells Church, Somersetshire 





In the possession of Albert Way, 

Mells, Somersetshire 


Fairford Church, Gloucestershire 

Wraysbiuy Church, Bucks .. 

Norbury Church, Derbyshire 

Charnwood Forest, Leicestershire 

Stowting Church, Kent 

St. Cross Church, near Winton . . 

Refectory, St. Cross 

St. Cross Church 





Now in the cloisters of Winchester 
College, originally in the chapel 
of New College, Oxford. 


Ditto .. .. 

















Quarries and pattern 



Ornaments, &c 



Christ bearing the Cross 

Tracery light 

Badge, Henry VII 


Lion's head 





Arms of Englaud 

Arms of Eleanor of Castile, 
Queen of Edward I. 


Quarries, &c. (144) 



Pattern on drapery 




Virgin Mary 



Border, French glass 





Heads and border 


Fragment of canopy 



Female head 

Heads and pattern 


Figure and part of light 



Borders, &c 

Quarries and pattern 


Badge, Cardinal Kemp 

Fragment of arms 


Where situate, or Owner's Name. 

Now in the cloisters of Winchester 
College, originally in the chapel 
of New College, Oxford. 






Ditto. (2.) Wanlip Church, Lei- 

Eomsey Abbey, Hants 

Mells, Somersetshire 

Chessington Church, Surrey, and 
Mr. Ward's. 

Farningham Church, Kent 

In the possession of Mr. Miller .. 

In the possession of Mr. Ward, sup- 
posed to be from Westminster 

Winchester (from New College), 
aud Snodland Church, Kent. 

Snodland Church, Kent 





Ditto, and Charthani Church, Kent 

Selling Church, Kent 

In the possession of Mr. Clutter- 

Thaxted Church, Essex 




Wichfont Church, Wilts .. .. 

Formerly in possession of late 
C. Winston. 

In the possession of N. Powell, Esq. 

In the possession of Mr. Ward . . 


Fairford Chinch, Gloucestershire 



Cassington, Oxfordshire 

Durweston Church, Dorsetshire .. 




East window, York Minster 

Chapter House, York Minster .. 

York Minster 

Snodland Church, Kent 


Stowting Church, Kent 

Kingsdown Church, Kent 

Winchester and Westminster Abbey 

St. Albans Abbey 

Fulham Palace 

Halsted Church, Essex 

Thaxted Church, Essex 












Fragment of canopy 

Tracery light 

Patterns, &e 

Portions of heads 


Hands, &c 


Fragments of a Jesse 
Fragments of a Jesse 
The Bourchier Knot 


Female head 

Tracery light 


Merchants' mark 

Quarries and borders 

Borders, &c 

Badge, St. John Peche 





Fragment of arms 

Fragments, &c 

Tracery light 

Quarries and borders 

Badge of Edward Prince of 


Arms, Henry VIII 

Arms, Bishop Boner. Motto, 

"Decliua mal &facbonum." 
Arms of the Bennct family, 

Clopton, Berks. 
Allegoric figure of November 
Emblem of St. Mark .. .. 

Arms, Warren 



Head of Christ 


St. Paul 



Our Saviour 




Border and fragments 



Infant Jesus 

Part of a canopy 

St. James 

Quarries and border 




"Where situate, or Owner's Name. 


Stratford Church, Essex 




Westminster Abbey 



Nethereale Church, Leicestershire 



Sevenoaks, Kent 

Belonged to the late C. Winston . . 
In the possession of Mr. Fletcher 
Eynesford CI mrch, Kent 
Farningham Church, Kent 
North Cray Church, Kent 
Rothley Church, Leicestersmre . . 
Thaxted Church, Essex 
Lullingstone Church, Kent 
In the possession of Mr. Ward 
Belonged to the late C. Winston . . 
In the possession of Mr. Ward . . 


Fawkham Church, Kent 


Ash Church, Kent 


In the possession of Mr. Andrews, 
Ewell, Surrey. 




Bilton Church, Warwickshire 

In the possession of Mr. Powell .. 

Ardingley Church, Sussex .. 


Nostel Priory, Yorkshire. Two of 

the canopies are dated a.d. 1534, 

a.d. 1535. 
Thorpe Church, Surrey 
Buckland Church, Surrey 



Firle Church, Sussex 




Thorpe Church, Surrey 


Ditto .. .. 




Frittenden Church, Kent 

Selling Church, Kent 

Formerly in possession of late 

C. Winston. 
In possession of E. Hailstone, Esq. 
Late C. Winston 



Where situate, or Owner's Name. 


Royal Badge 


Head of a Pope 




King David 


Crowned head 

Head of Virgin Mary 


Virgin Mary 

Infant Jesus 



Fragments '.. 

Love triumphant 

Pattern. Motto " Delectaro 
in Dfio." 

Pattern. Motto " Dns exalt- 

atio mea." 



Portion of a Jesse. Figures 

inscribed " Abdias " and 

" Achaz Rex." 
Head " Iaachaz rex " 

Tracery light 

Arms of Edward the Black 

Arms of Lionel Duke of 

Arms of John of Gaunt 
Arms ditto 

Agnus Dei 

Agnus Dei 




Fragment of a mitre 

Arms of Peake 
Arms of Peake 



Border and fragments 

Border and fragments 
Tracery light 

Formerly in possession of late 
C. Winston. 

Formerly at Franks House, Kent 

Bristol Cathedral 



Frittenden Church, Kent .. 

Bristol Cathedral 

East window, ditto 









Wilton, Wilts 

Portions of hall window, Bede 
House, Lyddiugton, Rutland- 



East Haddon, Northamptonshire 
Leverington Church, Cambridge- 


Thorpe Church, Surrey 

St. Albans, Herts 




Newick Church, Sussex 


German, painted on a piece of 
coated purple glass. Formerly 
in the possession of the late 
C. Winston. 


Shrivenham Church, Berks 

Formerly in possession of the late 
C. Winston. The blue jewel in 
the mitre is formed of a piece of 
blue glass stuck on the white, 
as described in the ' Diversarum 
Artrum Schedula' of Theophilus, 
lib. 2, chap. 28. 

In possession of R. Peake, Esq. . . 


Bristol Cathedral 

From a church near Bath 

Bristol Cathedral, taken from the 
east window in 1 847, but forming 
no part of the original design . . 


Bristol Cathedral 
















Fragments and heads .. 


I. H. S. arj( l inscription. "Hoc 

est nonien quod super oinne 



















Borders, &c 

Arms, Cohham of Sterhury . 
Anns of the Berkeley family 

Borders, &c 

Quarries, &c 

Fragments, &c 

Border and arms 

Armed figure (St. George ?) , 



Figure of St. Michael . . 


Arms, tan cross and bell 


Head and quariy 










Tracery light 


Specimen of ruby glass 






Bristol Cathedral 

Much Hadham Church, Herts 

Ditto .. .. 
Ditto .. .. 
Ditto .. .. 
Ditto .. .. 
Bristol Cathedral 
Ditto .. .. 







Ditto .". 







Ditto .. 


Ditto, south side choir 

Ditto, east window, but originally 
belonged to some other window. 



Much Hadham Church, Herts . . 


Stanford Church, Northampton- 





A. W. Franks, Esq 





Ditto , 



Ditto . 



Stowting Church, Kent . 








Quarries Hastingleigh Church, Kent 

Monks' heads Stowting Church, Kent 

Fragments | Nostel Priory, Yorkshire 



Where situate, or Owner's Name. 








































Part of a Jesse 









Quarry and border 





Figure and canopy 

Part of a canopy 

Our Saviour 

A group 

Arms, Berkeley family (Sir 
Maurice Berkeley of Stoke- 
Gifford, died a.d. 1347). 

Arms, Mortimer 

Part of a Jesse 

Head of Christ 

Tracery light 

Coat of arms 

St. Anthony 



Emblem of Holy Trinity 


Head, female 



Boyal arms, Edward III. 

Merchant's mark 


Emblem of the Holy Ghost . 




Tracery light 

Fragment of a tracery light 


Figure of Christ 

Group of figures 

Tracery light 

Tracery light (fetterlock) 


Borders and quarry 




Tracery light 

Tracery light 

Stowting Church, Kent 

Lincoln Cathedral, from various 
panels of the south lancet win- 
dows of the transept. 


Lincoln Cathedral 




A. W. Franks, Esq 









German glass, formerly in posses- 
sion of late Lord Herbert of Lea. 

Ditto .. 



Bristol Cathedral 



Long Ashton Church, Somerset 
shire. ' - 




Winscombe Church, Somersetshire 
St. Mary Redcliffe, Bristol . . 

Ditto .. ; 

Ditto .. 



Lady Chapel, Bristol Cathedral . . 
Mayor's Chapel, Bristol 







Conway Church, Carnarvonsihre . . 



Oddingley Church, Worcestershire 






Trinity Church, Coventry 



Frittenden Church, Kent 


2 A 














Tracery light 

Tracery light 

Tiacery li^ht 

Diaper pattern . . 
Figure and canopy 

Tracery light 

Eose and quarries 


Part of a canopy 

Bird quarries 



Part of a figure 


Head of a lower light 

Arms of England 

Tracery light 

Arms of France 

Arms of Edward the Confessor 
Fragment of a canopy 

Quarries, dated 1578 

Arms, dated 1578 


Part of a figure 

Tracery light 

Merchant's mark 

Merchant's mark 

Tracery light 

Cipher, T L. 

Arms, Nicholas Bubwith, 
Bishop of Wells, 1408-1424. 







Motto of Cardinal De la Marck, 

"Decipimur votis, tempore 

fallimur, mors deridet curas 

anxia vita nichl.'' 
Legend of St. Catherine 
Mary Magdalene washing our 

Saviour's feet. 



Arms (Arden?; 






Where situate, or Owner's Name. 


Frittenden Church, Kent 




Ashchurch, Gloucestershire.. 




Bristol Cathedral, choir windows 

In the possession of Mr. Chichester 


Possession of Kev. P. Aubertin, 
Froyle, Hants. 

Bodburn Church, Wilts 



Froyle Church, Hants 





In the possession of A. W. Franks, 

In the possession of Rev. P. Auber- 
tin, junior. 



In the possession of Mr. J. Ward 

In the possession of Kev. P. Auber- 
tin, junior. 

Bristol Cathedral 


Almshouse Chapel, Wells 



Barkwell Church, Somersetshire . . 

Bristol Cathedral 


In the possession of Mr. Bell, 


Merton Chapel, Oxford 
Lichfield Cathedral 

West Horsley Church, Surrey 


Wavendon Church, Bucks 


Ditto. There is a stratum of light 
red glass in the midst of the blue 
sheet, seen section-wise. 




In the possession of Rev. P. Auber- 
tin, junior. 



Where situate, or Owner's Name. 




Bristol Cathedral 

Part of a Jesse. On a scroll 
" Ezechias ;" at the bottom of 
the window is written "Anno 
Domini mcccccxxxiii." 


Part of a Jesse 



Anns of France 





Tracery light 





Geometrical pattern 
Geometrical pattern 




Martyrdom of St. Stephen . . 

Group, Ci.rist and the Apostles 



Tracery light 


Figure and canopy 




Angel Gabriel 






Tracery light. The Prince of 

Wales's feathers and motto. 


King David 


Fragments, inscribed " Iero- 

nimi," " Augustini," "Gre- 

Arms, William of Wykeham 

Arms, St. George 


In the possession of Rev. P. Auber- 
tin, junior. 


Llanrhaidr Church, Denbighshire 


Dyserth Church, Flintshire .. 

Salisbury Cathedral 


Ditto, originally belonged to the 
Chapter House. 

Ditto .. .. 




St. Thomas's Church, Salisbury .. 

Salisbury Cathedral 







East Brent Church, Somersetshire 

Salisbury Cathedral 

Grately Church, Hants, originally 
belonged to Salisbury Cathedral. 

Formerly in the possession of the 
late Lord Herbert of Lea. 

Grately Church, Hants, originally 
belonged to Salisbury Cathe- 


Trumpiugton Church, Cambridge- 





Grately Church, Hants. Tin's 
glass originally belonged to 
Salisbury Cathedral. 




In the possession of Mr. Miller . . 

King's College Chapel, Cambridge 


Fairford Church, Gloucestershire 


Llanrhaidr Church, Denbighshire 



New College, Oxford. The Hall 


















































Arms ('probably of the old see 

of Winchester). 

Part of a canopy 











Tracery light 

Sir E. Hutton's arms 

A border 

Lord Chief Justice Hyde's 


Part of a knight 

Two heads 

Tracery light 

Tracery light 

Tracery light 

Tracery light 

Head of Christ 






Tracery light 

Quarry and border 





















Tracery light 

A monk 

Tracery lights 

Tracery lights, &c. 


St. George 

St. Christopher 

Where situate, or Owner's Name. 

New College, Oxford. The Hall 

Wouldham Church, Kent 


In the possession of Mr. Chichester 






Horfield Church, Gloucestershire 
St. Peter's Church, Oxford .. 

staple Inn Hall 

Belonging to Mr. Ward 

Middle Temple Hall 

In the possession of Mr. Warring- 
Adderlmry Chinch, Oxfordshire . . 


Merton Chapel, Oxford 






In the possession of Mr. Lucas . . 

Ditto .. .. 

Merton College, Oxford 

Stoekbury Cnurch, Kent 





Cologne Cathedral , 






Bioeklesbv Church, Lincolnshire 



Takeley Church, Essex . . 

St. Denis's Church, York 

Bushbury Church, Staffordshire . . 









Oddinglev Church, Worcestershire 


E. Hailstone, Esq 

Aldwinkle St. Peter's, Northamp- 






686 Tracery light, with kneeling 
figure. Inscription defaced : 
" Orate pro." 

657 Pattern 

658 The Saviour 

689 Window-head 

690 Part of the Assumption 

691 Window-head 

692 Border 

693 Borders 

694 Angels with censers 

695 Tracery light 

696 Figure, tracery light (St. 


697 Head of canopy 

698 Head of canopy 

699 Badge of Anne Bolcyn 

700 Borders 

701 Turkish glass 

702 Circle 

703 Ornament 

704 Head of our Saviour 

705 Ornament 

70S Ornament 

707 Fragment 

708 Head of a saint 

709 Head of a saint 

710 Head of an archbishop 

711 Fragments 

712 Angel 

713 Figure 

714 Legend of St. Gregory .. 

715 Head of a female 

716 Head of a bishop 

717 Fragment of drapery 

718 Group 

719 Head of a monk 

720 Head of a saint 

721 Emblems of St. Mark and 

St. John. 

722 An angel censing 

723 Border and Quarry 

724 Tracery light 

725 Pattern 

726 Pattern 

727 Head of a bishop 

728 Angel 

729a \A bishop 

729V J 


729c? J 

730 Pattern 

731 Head 

732 Head 

733 Tracery light 

Where situate, or Owner's Name. 

Aldwinkle St. Peter's, Northamp- 

Bushbury Church, Staffordshire . . 



Aldwinkle St. Peter's, Northamp- 

Stow-Bardolph Church, Norfolk . . 

Lincoln Cathedral 

Merton Chapel, Oxford 

Lincoln Cathedral 

Barnewall Church, Northampton- 

From an early Perpendicular win- 



Formerly at a farmhouse near 
Hadley, Suffolk. 

Lincoln Cathedral 

Formerly in the possession of the 
late J. Bell, Esq., M.P., from 
Cairo ; it was set in plaster 













Inserted in the North Rose, Lincoln 

North Rose, Lincoln 








Hunsdon Church, Herts 


Salisbury Cathedral 







Tours Cathedral 

Ditto ... 

North Moreton Church, Berks .. 

J late. 
























Anns of Thomas Magas fa 
foundling), Canon of Wind- 
sor from 1520-1547 : motto, 
"As God will." 





Figure and canopy 

Figure and canopy 

Figure and canopy 

Figure and canopy 

Tracery light 



Arms of the Stafford family 
( originally with the arms of 
William de Bohun, Earl of 
Northampton, 1337-1360). 


Tracery light 










Tracery light 


Arms of Heniy Earl of Lan- 
caster, a.d. 1327-45. 


Figure and canopy 
Figure and canopy 
Figure and canopy 
Figure and canopy 

Pattern and arms 

Arms of Valence and Hastings 
Portion of a window 

Part of a figure 

A window-head 

Group, inscribed "Voce manu 
plaudentes," &c. 

Stafford Badge 

Emblem of St. John 

) St. Lawrence 

f Window-head 



Where situate, or Owner's Name. 

North Moreton Church, Berks . . 
Mr. Balchelor's house in the 
Cloisters, Windsor Castle. 


Lincoln Cathedral 



North Moreton Church 




Salisbury Chapter-house 

From the mosque of Sultan Soly- 

mau, Constantinople. 
Longdon Church, Staffordshire . . 



Lichfield Cathedral 

St. Peter's Church, St. Albans, 

In possession of C. H. Wdson, Esq. 
In possession of Mr. Miller 




Gloucester Cathedral 






East window, Gloucester Cathedral 








From the Upper Cloisters, Windsor 

Nettlestead Church, Kent 





Now in possession of Rev. Lambert 
Larkins, but formerly in Ayles- 
ford Church, Kent 

Florence Cathedral, in the posses- 
sion of G. Aitchison, Esq. 



Angers Cathedral, window in, page 38. 

Annealing oven, 233. 

Antiquating painted glass, 45, 181. 

Arrangement usual in windows of different kinds, 241. 

Backgrounds in glass-paintings, 41, 127. 
Bertini of Milan, 187, 189. 
Blue glass, Early English, 182. 

, to what the tint is due, 110, note. 

is not coloured with Lapis Lazuli, 182. 

Boutemps, his remarks on the distribution of prizes in 1851, 156, note. 

Brussels Cathedral, painted glass in, 188, 195, 251, 323, note. 

Bull's-eye, 233. 

Byzantine style; cessation of, 43. 

, influence of, on glass-painting, 229, 237. 

Canopies in Decorated glass-painting, 39. 

splendid, in Munich Cathedral, 211. 

and groups differently treated in England and on the Continent, 244. 

Capronnier, 189. 

window by, at Brussels, 156. 

Cartoons, remarks on Raphael's, 205. 

Chiaroscuro in glass-paintings, 316, 317. 

Cinque-cento style, places where examples of it occur, 86, note. 

, lead work in, 249. 

, judicious choice of subjects in, 195, 250. 

Cleaning old glass, effects of, 185. 

Clearstory windows, treatment of, 59. 

Colouring, effect of deep, in diminishing the size of a building, 201. 

, Sir J. Reynolds's remarks on, 199. 

Conway Church, window in, 38. 

Copper as a colouring matter, 226, 286, note. 

Costume, medifeval, copied from the antique, 219, 242. 

Crowned letters, 133, note. 

Cyclas, 164. 

Cylinder of glass, 234. 

Dalmatic, 219, 242. 

Danish Raven borne by some families, 263, note. 
Decorated style of glass-painting, remarks on, 39. 
and Early English compared, 40. 

360 INDEX. 

Decorated style, requisites in imitations of the, page 103. 

, places where examples occur, 86 note, 107. 

Dene, Peter de, his life, 265. 

Eagles, double and single-headed in window at York, 277. 

double-headed, origin of, 278, 281, note. 

, occurrence of, on tiles, Saracenic coins, &c, 280, 28 L. 

Early English windows, principle of the colouring of, 94. 

, places where examples occur, 86, note. 

Eastlake, Sir C, quoted, 2U5, 206. 

Egington, 125. 

Enamel brown, 232. 

Enamel system of glass-painting, 81. 

Figure and canopy windows, 238. 

Flatness in glass-paintings, considered, 101, 213, 255, 310 note, 315. 

, incipient change from, to rotundity, 197, 243. 

Flaxman, on the abundance of Scriptural subjects, 212. 

Flux, 79, 232. 

Fonthill, glass from, at Bristol, 167. 

Glass, mode of making, 233. 

, coated, 81, 234. 

, difference between ancient and modern, 148, note. 

, Greek, 201. 

, Greek and Roman coloured, 176, note. 

, silver-coloured, 189. 

, change in manufacture in 14th cent., 178, 243. 

Glass-painting, process of, 78, 231. 

, the different styles of, 64, 82, 285, note. 

Glasgow cathedral, windows in, 50, 54, 320. 

, compared with those in Lichfield cathedral, 57, 320. 

Gold colours glass red, 226, note. 
Gouda, painted windows at, 251. 
Grately church, windows in, 107, note. 

Harmony between the material and mode of working it, 38, 210, 245. 
Heraldry, friendship and companionship in arms, how commemorated in, 

304, note. 
Herckenrode, Abbey of, 312, 321, note. 
Hospitallers and Templars personified, 166, 275. 

Imitation, Dr. Johnson's remarks on, 128. 

'' Ironed-out-flat " style of glass-painting, 310 note, 315. 

Jesse windows, 109, 238, 239. 

, arrangement of, 168. 

Jury, report of, on painted glass in 1851, 156, note. 

Lead-work in mosaic glass-paintings, 193. 
, a design should have reference to, 54, 249. 

INDEX. 361 

Le Mans Cathedral, very ancient glass in, page 78. 
Limoges, the cradle of glass-painting, 217, 237. 

, Venetian colony at, 217, 237. 

Lincoln Cathedral, the sculpture in, 43. 

Lions and Fleurs-de-lis, border of, to what time it refers, 106. 

Medallion windows, 94, 102, 238, 241. 

, small figures in, objectionable, 94, note. 

Mullions cause a change in glass-painting, 211, 243. 

may be disregarded, 211. 

Munich school of glass-painting, 36. 
, improved practice of, 320. 

Nettlestead Church, glass in, compared with that at Gloucester, 58. 
Nimbus sometimes omitted, 297, note. 

Opaqueness, mode of ascertaining proper degree of, in glass, 180. 

Pagan and Paganism, abuse of the terms, 172, 230. 
Painted glass, 75, 237. 

, most ancient in England, 71, 78. 

, modern in Arundel Castle, 85, 187. 

Brussels Cathedral, 156. 

Chester Cathedral, 97. 

Ely Cathedral, 97, 110 note, 147 note. 

Lincoln Cathedral, 21. 

— ■ Norwich Cathedral, 23. 

St. Andrew's, Holborn, 252. 

■ St. George's Chapel, Windsor, 252. 

• St. Germain l'Auxerrois, Paris, 49. 

Stafford Church, 103. 

St. Vincent de Paul, Paris, 202. 

■ ■ Westminster Abbey, 98, note ; 100, note. 

Patina, la, 44, 47. 

Pattern-window, 238, 241. 

Pearson, 126. 

Peckett, window at York by, 75, 153, note. 

Perpendicular style of glass-painting, places where examples occur, 83, 86, note. 

Picture-windows, 95, 98, 238. 

Pot-metal, 79, 81. 

Price, 150. 

Quarterly Coat of Arms, early instance of, 302, note. 

Receding pictures in glass-painting, 205, 206, 
Restoration, mischief of, 308. 

, judicious, at Bristol, 160. 

of the North Rose, Lincoln, 222. 

of Gloucester east window, 308. 

, estimates for, and cost of, this last, 309, note. 

Reynolds, Sir J., designs by, 85, 125, 155, 187, 251. 

Rouen, glass for Exeter, Westminster, and Merton College, brought from, 171. 

, painted window from, at York, 74. 

2 B 



Ruby glass, page 81. 

, the oldest, 71. 

, revived manufacture of, 66, 171. 

, gold, 226, note. 

, smooth, 228. 

, streaky, 226, 227, 286, note. 

Saddle-bars, a design should have reference to, 241). 

St. Sophia's, Constantinople, 235. 
Sculpture in Lincoln Cathedral, 43. 
Shading, smear, 80. 
, , stippled, 147, 80, note. 

, stipple, 80, 100. 

Solvman, Sultan, mosque of, glazing in, 236. 

Stigmata, the, when, and when not, represented, 109, note. 

Suger's glass at St. Denis, 78, 201, 238. 

Tertian: in religious houses, 270, note. 

Theophilus, Diversarum Artium Schedula, 78, 82 note, 237, 296 note 

Tinfoil behind glass, 189. 

Toga, saints represented in, 220, 242. 

Tracery lights, white glass favourable to, 209. 

Valsecchi, portrait on glass by, 186. 

White glass, use of, 93, 99, 100. 

Yellow stain, 80. 

, earliest example of, 261, note. 

Ornamented circle, whh I. H. S., from Thaxted Church, Essex, 1490.